T':' 


tfe’--,*'.  ^'t-v  -.  i' 


;'-1^V 


S'.#?  ‘*1 '• 


vs  -*r’.i^ 


r'?'#’v'*’ 


tP,  i?*. 


STd 


^ *Y-’ 


•rv«5?2 


s^;v 


kti 


5 '*j>''L7,  ’■'’>r*'V':  V-'  - :-/ 


mxmm 


n. 


■ .*»!i  MB'/'  5(^tv  ^“•'  .'  -•  Xm  - "-■'  - ■ ■ 


J.. 


^■eS; 


'■rfl;../, 


'-'C'-'  “ :V".'  ',  J>i  '•'^-  ■^'‘')  . ' '■' 


- -a'.-- ■?.< 


|Si::.;f;; 


1 


:-F 


'K?i  “ 


if -Is 


:.j^  : -«..  .-  I-^*'.  - 


-M^'  h 


I' 

I 

‘ ■--  » >,.  «*  ■ 


B?  5 t-‘\  v;-?  f? 

'■•:'■■  •,?#'i"f;j'8tf  7w,.'  li..'->iM 


>?/ 


e 


o,'^'  f l!?*‘ V r t -y  *'  'J^' 

mt'-rk%*m*4m 

ti- iVi;:  >f<J'‘l{ 

''‘*'7|fisif|i 


..•.V  .tft-?'  71  ••  •■  ; ■■  ■ 


If:,: 


A'  7i* 


1 -(?-;•  s - ''  V > • , 


r 


fc 


.-■7;  } 


.5.  ■'  i'‘  s 


il|;i 


• :-  '•■; :;.:  . • 

S' •',-i'  'v.'*  “ ■ • ~ ' “'^" ' 


■»,•>>.  .i.  ^ V'-  .X*-  «•■'  ■;  -■  . 

!>•*  i>. 


'n 


v : - 


Mmt 

||:|^ 


y ’>77  •''l,/.  'ja'  -VL  i 

•WK  •*.  -*--■•  , .-A  r?'  > .-  . a’»»  a 


M 


‘ -f^  ' - --• 


t felts. 


>v  4-'? "!^^ 


I 


•,  -j' 


- iS 


j-'v  '1  f f 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/franciscodezurba00casc_0 


FRANCISCO  DE  ZURBARAN 


FRANCISCO  DE  ZURBARAN 

HIS  EPOCH,  HIS  LIFE  AND  HIS  WORKS 


BY 

JOSE  CASCALES  Y MUNOZ 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  SPANISH 
BY 

NELLIE  SEELYE  EVANS 


NEW  YORK 

PRIVATELY  PRINTED 
MCMXVIII 


Copyright,  1918,  by 
Frederic  Fairchild  Sherman 


the  J PAUl  C'TTY  A,’>'JSWM 

LIukARY 


^'1' 


L 


Portrait  of  a Dominican  Monk 
Hispanio  Museum,  NewYork 


TO 

THE  MEMORY  OF  MY  FATHER 

HENRY  EDWARD  SEELYE 


■V. 


■<7^ 


CONTENTS 


List  of  Illustrations 


PAGE 

vii 


Report  of  the  Royal  Academy  of  Arts  of  San  Fer- 
nando: Spanish  Editor’s  Preface xi 

Facsimile  of  Certificate  of  Baptism  of  Zurbaran  . . xiv 

Translation  of  Certificate  of  Baptism xv 

Sketch  of  the  Author’s  Life xvii 

Author’s  Preface xix 

Editor’s  Note xxiii 

Legends  l 

The  Epoch  of  Zurbaran 7 

The  Life  of  the  Artist 11 

The  Paintings  of  Zurbaran 40 

The  Paintings  of  Zurbaran  in  the  Light  of  Criticism  . 62 

The  Painter  in  the  Light  of  His  Works 116 


Appendix  No.  1.  Contract  of  Apprenticeship  of  Fran- 
cisco De  Zurbaran 134 

Appendix  No.  2.  Memo,  of  the  Moving  to  Seville  of 

THE  Residence  of  Zurbaran 137 

Appendix  No.  3.  Letter  of  D.  Elias  Tormo  y Monzo  . 140 

Appendix  No.  4.  Letter  from  Zurbaran  to  the  Mar- 
quis DE  LAS  Torres 147 


Appendix  No.  Valuation  by  Zurbaran  and  Francisco 
DE  Rici,  IN  1654,  OF  Pictures  Mentioned  in  the 


Will  of  Francisco  Jacinto  de  Salcedo  ....  149 
Notes 154 


LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS 


Portrait  of  a Dominican  Monk Frontispiece 

Hispanic  Museum,  New  York. 

FACING 

PAOB 


Portrait  of  Zurbaran i 

Museum  of  Brunswick,  Germany. 

The  Child  Virgin  (Conception) 2 

Property  of  the  Heirs  of  D.  Jose  Maria  Lopez  de  Cepero,  Seville. 

The  Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas 4 

Provincial  Museum  of  Seville. 

The  Infant  Jesus  Asleep  on  the  Cross 6 

Museum  of  the  Prado,  Madrid. 

The  Virgin  of  the  Caves 8 

Provincial  Museum  of  Cadiz. 

St.  Hugo  in  the  Refectory 10 

Provincial  Museum  of  Seville. 

The  Meeting  of  St.  Bruno  with  Pope  Urban  II  . . . . 12 

Provincial  Museum  of  Seville. 

The  Child  Jesus  Injured  by  the  Thorns 14 

Collection  of  D.  Cayetano  Sanchez  Pineda,  Seville. 

St.  Buenaventura  Visited  by  St.  Thomas 14 

Kaiser-Frederick  Museum,  Berlin. 

The  Holy  Face 16 

Collection  of  D.  Mariano  Pacheco,  Madrid. 

Adoration  of  the  Shepherds 18 

National  Gallery,  London. 

Adoration  of  the  Shepherds 20 

Collection  of  the  Countess  of  Paris,  Chateau  of  Randan, 
Auvergne. 

The  Virgin  of  the  Rosary 22 

Hospital  of  the  Blood,  Seville. 

Jesus  Blessing  the  World 24 

Iturbe  Collection,  Madrid. 


FACING 

PAGB 

Father  Gonzalo  Illescas 26 

Monastery  of  Guadalupe. 

The  Celestial  Chastisement  of  St.  Jerome 28 

Monastery  of  Guadalupe. 

Jesus  Rewarding  the  Holy  Zeal  of  Father  Salmeron  ...  30 

Monastery  of  Guadalupe. 

St.  Jerome  in  Glory 30 

Monastery  of  Guadalupe. 

The  Crucifixion 32 

Property  of  the  Heirs  of  the  Marquis  of  Villafuerte,  Seville. 

St.  Buenaventura  Presiding  Over  a Chapter  of  the  Lesser  Friars  34 
I.ouvre,  Paris. 

Funeral  of  a Saint 36 

Louvre,  Paris. 

Virgin  with  Two  Saints 38 

National  Gallery,  Edinburgh,  Scotland. 

Child  Virgin  at  Prayer 40 

Property  of  D.  Aureliano  de  Beruete,  Madrid. 

St.  Francis  of  Assisi 4^ 

Provincial  Museum  of  Seville. 

St.  Buenaventura  Visited  by  an  Angel 44 

Museum  of  Dresden. 

Master  Friar  Francisco  Zumel 48 

Royal  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  Madrid. 

St.  Carmel,  Bishop  of  Teruel 50 

Provincial  Museum  of  Seville. 

Master  Friar  Peter  Machado 52 

Royal  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  Madrid. 

Prince  Baltasar 54 

Kaiser  Frederick  Museum,  Berlin. 

St.  Catherine  of  Sienna ^6 

Owned  by  Infanta  Dona  Isabella  of  Bourbon,  Madrid. 

The  Immaculate  Conception 58 

Collection  of  the  Marquis  of  Cerralvo,  Madrid. 

Christ  Crowning  Joseph 60 

The  Louvre. 

The  Blessed  Alonzo  Rodriguez 62 

Royal  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  Madrid. 


FACING 

PAGE 

St.  Lawrence 62 

The  Hermitage,  Petrograd. 

Santa  Ruffina 64 

Property  of  Mr.  Archer  M.  Huntington,  New  York. 

St.  Lucia 66 

The  Ehrich  Galleries,  New  York. 

St.  Inez 68 

Hospital  of  the  Blood,  Seville. 

St.  Margaret 70 

Hospital  of  the  Blood,  Seville. 

The  Annunciation 72 

Collection  of  the  Countess  of  Paris,  Chateau  of  Randan, 

Auvergne. 

The  Circumcision 74 

Collection  of  the  Countess  of  Paris,  Chateau  of  Randan, 

Auvergne. 

St.  Margaret 76 

National  Gallery,  London. 

St.  Ignatius  Loyola 78 

The  Ehrich  Galleries,  New  York. 

St.  Louis  Beltran  . . . . 78 

Provincial  Museum  of  Seville. 

Student  of  the  University  of  Salamanca 80 

Collection  of  Mrs.  John  Lowell  Gardner,  Boston. 

A Holy  Carthusian  Martyr 82 

Provincial  Museum  of  Cadiz. 

Master  Friar  Jeronimo  Perez 84 

Royal  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  Madrid. 

The  Daughters  of  Juan  de  Roelas 86 

The  Ehrich  Galleries,  New  York. 

St.  Casilda 88 

Museum  of  the  Prado,  Madrid. 

Hercules  Killing  the  Cretan  Bull 90 

Museum  of  the  Prado,  Madrid. 

Hercules  Killing  the  Hydra  of  Lerna 92 

Museum  of  the  Prado,  Madrid. 

St.  Casilda 94 

Collection  of  the  late  Sir  William  Van  Horne,  Montreal,  Canada. 


VACIKO 

PAOB 

St.  John  the  Baptist  in  the  Desert 94 

Provincial  Museum  of  Cadiz. 

St.  Francis  of  Paula 96 

Collection  of  Mr.  D.  J.  Macdougall,  Seville. 

The  Blessed  Enrique  Suzon 98 

Provincial  Museum  of  Seville. 

The  Jubilee  of  St.  Francis lOO 

Provincial  Museum  of  Cadiz. 

St.  Francis  of  Assisi 102 

Collection  of  D.  Aureliano  de  Beruete,  Madrid. 

St.  Mathew 104 

Provincial  Museum  of  Cadiz. 

Virgin  of  the  Mercy 108 

Collection  of  the  Countess  of  Paris,  Auvergne. 

The  Immaculate  Conception 112 

Museum  of  Buda-Pest. 

Christ  Replacing  His  Vesture  After  Flagellation  . . . .116 

Church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  Jadraque. 

The  Sacristry  and  Chapel  of  Guadalupe 118 


REPORT  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  OF  ARTS 
OF  SAN  FERNANDO 

Spanish  Editor’s  Preface 

I WISHED  to  offer  to  my  constant  patrons  a new 
book  upon  the  subject  of  Art,  but  not  having  con- 
fidence in  my  own  judgment  to  fully  appreciate 
what  Senor  Cascales  y Munoz  had  offered  me,  I desired 
the  advice  of  the  authorities  in  the  matter,  and  the  fol- 
lowing is  the  reply  of  the  Royal  Academy  of  San  Fer- 
nando upon  the  subject  of  this  work,  devoted  to  the  study 
of  Zurbaran : 

t 

“In  the  presence  of  an  artist  of  such  distinction  toward 
whom  no  criticism,  until  recently,  has  especially  been  di- 
rected, who  has  only  been  judged  superficially,  and  con- 
cerning whose  life  no  documental  proofs  in  the  number 
that  were  to  be  desired  have  been  forthcoming,  Senor 
Cascales  y Munoz  who,  like  Zurbaran,  is  a native  of  Ex- 
tremadura, has  felt  the  noble  desire  to  render  to  this 
artist  a tribute  of  admiration,  reuniting  and  collecting 
dates,  notices,  documents  and  antecedent  facts,  and  sep- 
arate critical  comments,  to  form  of  these  a book,  and  as 
he  modestly  says  in  the  brief  introduction,  ho  contribute 
his  grain  of  sand’  to  the  legitimate  glory  of  the  artist. 

“In  respect  to  the  life  of  Zurbaran,  he  affirms  that  the 
artist  was  not  in  Seville  during  childhood,  but  when 
there  was  a well  grown  youth;  neither  did  he  study  un- 

xi 


der  the  direction  of  de  Roelas,  as  has  been  asserted  from 
the  time  of  Palomino  till  now  by  all  his  biographers. 
Neither  could  he  have  been  influenced  by  the  work  of 
Caravaggio,  to  which  his  own  bears  no  similitude;  and 
adds  the  curious  information  discovered  by  Sr.  Rodri- 
guez Marin  in  the  Archives  of  the  Registry  in  Seville, 
that  the  first  master  of  Zurbaran  was  Pedro  Diaz  de 
Villanueva,  a painter  of  images. 

“There  follows  with  much  minuteness  and  copies  of 
data,  the  life  of  the  painter  in  Llerena  (not  in  Puente  de 
Cantos,  as  was  supposed) , and  in  Seville,  where  he  was 
warmly  appreciated,  and  afterwards  in  Madrid.  The 
author  was  greatly  helped  in  these  investigations  by  the 
notes  collected  and  published  by  Sr.  Gestoso  in  his  ‘Dic- 
tionary of  Sevillian  Artists’  under  the  title  of  ‘History 
and  Present  Location  of  the  Works  of  Zurbaran.’  Sr. 
Cascales  y Munoz  has  made  a very  complete  catalogue  of 
his  works,  indicating  the  places  where  they  may  be  found, 
whether  in  churches  and  convents  for  which  they  were 
painted,  or  public  and  private  collections,  both  national 
and  foreign. 

“The  chapter  which  treats  of  ‘The  Pictures  of  Zur- 
baran in  the  Light  of  Criticism’  is  as  its  name  indicates, 
a resume  of  the  opinions  of  ancient  and  modern  critics, 
as  well  as  a few  articles  from  the  artists  of  to-day. 
Among  these  is  that  of  our  friend,  D.  Jose  Villegas, 
which,  as  usual,  is  very  original  and  was  written  expressly 
for  this  volume. 

“Finally,  under  the  heading  of  ‘The  Painter  as  Re- 
vealed in  his  Works,’  Sr.  Cascales  y Munoz  presents  an 
exhaustive  study  of  the  artist’s  personality  and  his  pro- 
ductions which  shine  with  a powerful  light  in  the  natu- 

xii 


ralistic  trend  that  is  characteristic  of  Spanish  painting. 

“Such  is  the  work  of  our  author,  which  reveals  his 
constancy  in  pursuing  his  task  to  the  end,  and,  among 
other  things  already  indicated,  he  excels  in  having  writ- 
ten the  first  book  dedicated  to  Zurbaran.” 

The  foregoing  was  written  January  26,  1911.  Since 
then  the  work  has  been  enriched  by  Sr.  Cascales  y 
Munoz  with  other  notes  based  upon  recent  discoveries, 
and  considerably  enlarged  by  new  chapters. 

Finally,  those  interested  in  Art  can  read  and  judge 
of  the  merits  of  the  book,  and  if  it  pleases  them  the 
editor  will  be  satisfied. 

Editor  of  the  Spanish  Edition 
Published  in  Madrid 


K2.99e,50Q^ 


'CCrrv-L  -h 


^ ^ — ■ 


r ^ ^ ^“7^^ 

\^liy J^U  ^MT  c/  jenoC^iAyj^ 

yriA'UxytMj 

\lCi  M-i  ■■  ^ axaw^^^i^i*^  Xnaxc^y/) 

oJyf>  q^(A<^  •J'eX^y^gT^ 


/Cb 


7n.ia,ucu  Jol?U?' 


'A^/  ^ 


•'/l/tA^  A/  ‘7-C^ 


Certificate  of  Baptism  of  Zurbaran. 

A.  2996509. 

Doctor  don  Cruz  Rubiales  Aguilar,  being  priest  in 
charge  of  the  parochial  church  of  Our  Lady  of  Granada, 
only  church  in  this  city.  Certifies  that  in  book  No.  3,  in 
the  Registry  of  Baptism  which  is  kept  in  the  Archives  of 
the  parish,  page  170,  there  is  the  following  statement: 

In  the  town  of  Fuente  de  Cantos  on  the  seventh  day  of 
the  month  of  November  of  fifteen  hundred  and  ninety- 
eight,  Sr.  Diego  Martinez  Montes,  priest  in  said  town, 
baptised  a son  of  Louis  de  Zurbaran  and  of  his  wife  Isa- 
bel Marquez.  His  godfather  was  Pedro  Garcia  del 
Corro,  priest,  and  the  midwife  was  Maria  Dominguez; 
both  knowing  their  duties  and  obligations  gave  him  the 
name  of  Francisco,  and  Diego  Martinez  Montes,  thus 
witnessed.” 

The  present  statement  is  a copy  of  the  original,  in  proof 
of  which,  I give  the  present  certificate  which  I sign  and 
seal  in  Fuente  de  Cantos,  on  the  seventh  of  April  of  nine- 
teen hundred  and  five. 

Dr.  Cruz  Rubiales  Aguilar. 

(Attested.) 


XV 


SKETCH  OF  THE  AUTHOR’S  LIFE 


Senor  Don  Jose  Cascales-y-Munoz,  the  distinguished 
author  of  “Francisco  de  Zurbaran,”  was  born  of  a fine  old 
Spanish  family  in  Villa-Franca  (Bajadoz)  February 
28th,  1865,  his  parents  being  D.  G.  Cascales  Lopez  and 
E,  Munoz  Garcia.  He  passed  brilliantly  through 
college,  having  received  degrees  from  four  separate  in- 
stitutions in  Seville  when  still  quite  young.  As  early  as 
1883  he  began  writing  for  the  press,  and  his  enthusiasm 
embraced  all  subjects,  art,  politics,  archaeology,  history, 
architecture,  etc.  He  is  still  an  honored  correspondent 
of  many  important  periodicals  in  Spain  and  other  Eu- 
ropean countries.  Later  in  life  desiring  to  study  law  he 
went  to  Madrid  and  graduated  in  1898  with  special 
honors.  Senor  Munoz’  intense  patriotism  has  been 
shown  in  various  ways  as  orator,  editor  and  sociologist. 

In  1889  he  began  those  serious  studies  of  political  and 
social  questions  that  form  the  chief  subject  of  his  later 
works.  He  was  the  founder  of  the  Society  of  Research 
of  Seville,  and  a few  years  ago  endowed  a Chair  of 
Sociology  in  the  Central  University,  Madrid,  this  be- 
ing the  first  time  such  a chair  had  been  founded  in  any 
University  in  the  world.  Senor  Munoz  belongs  to  many 
foreign  scientific  societies,  and  is  also  a corresponding 
member  of  the  Hispanic  Museum,  New  York.  Of  his 
personal  character  his  intimate  friend  the  novelist  Senor 
D.  J.  O.  Mufiilla  says:  “He  has  a noble  heart,  loyal  in 

xvii 


friendship  and  full  of  delicate  and  generous  feeling>. 
His  indomitable  will  never  shrinks  before  the  most  labor- 
ious tasks,  and  he  is  constantly  seeking  subjects  that  will 
be  of  interest  to  the  public.  No  sooner  has  he  finished 
one  theme  than  he  is  eager  to  begin  another. 

“Senor  Munoz’  chief  claim  to  fame  is  that  of  a publicist, 
and  to  appreciate  the  great  value  of  his  works  one  must 
remember  that  they  are  not  the  fruit  of  imagination,  but 
the  result  of  close  study,  deep  erudition,  and  great 
breadth  of  view,  gained  by  wide  reading  and  reflection, 
as  well  as  direct  observation.” 

His  book  on  Francisco  de  Zurbaran  has  plainly  been  a 
labor  of  love,  and  no  one  was  better  fitted  to  appreciate 
the  great  artist’s  noble  but  rugged  personality. 

In  his  relations  with  the  translator  Senor  Munoz  has 
exquisitely  sustained  all  the  best  traditions  of  Spanish 
courtesy. 

N.  S.  E. 


xviii 


AUTHOR’S  PREFACE 


There  are  few  painters  whose  lives  have  re- 
mained in  obscurity  for  so  long  a time  as  Fran- 
cisco de  Zurbaran’s,  the  eminent  painter  of  the 
“Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas T and  about  whose 
importance,  in  the  golden  age  of  Art,  so  much  has  been 
imagined  upon  so  slight  a foundation.  He  has  been 
represented  as  being  unknown  by  his  contemporaries  (a 
thing  absurd  in  the  light  of  the  culture  of  the  time) , and 
forced  to  work  for  a salary,  when  we  know  that  he  was 
pressed  for  time  to  execute  the  many  orders  which  soon 
came  to  him  from  all  directions. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  ignorance  of  his  early  biog- 
raphers has  given  rise  to  his  title  of  the  Spanish  Cara- 
vaggio, labelling  him  as  an  imitator  of  the  Italian  artist 
(though  he  learned  nothing  from  the  latter  and  did  not 
even  have  the  opportunity  of  knowing  him) . 

In  the  fifth  year  of  the  twentieth  century  Zurbaran’s  ^ 
time  came,  in  one  of  those  series  of  national  manifesta- 
tions which,  like  centennials  and  expositions  of  art,  oc- 
curring many  years  after  the  death  of  the  respective 
artist,  represent  in  the  profane  world  what  a canoniza- 
tion does  in  the  religious  one.  It  is  the  consecration  of 
superior  men  recognized  and  confirmed  by  posterity.  In 
1905"  such  an  exposition  of  Zurbaran’s  works  was  held  in 
Madrid. 

This  celebration  ^ was  necessary  in  order  that  the 

xix 


learned  world  should  realize  that  a large  part  of  the  ex- 
istence of  the  painter  yet  remains  unknown,  and  that  they 
should  feel  the  incentive  to  search  in  archives,  libraries 
and  museums  for  the  data  that  is  missing  to  complete, 
and  one  might  even  say,  to  write  for  the  first  time  his 
interesting  biography. 

What  was  the  real  life  of  Zurbaran^  What  his  social 
position  as  a man,  and  what  his  significance  and  impor- 
tance as  an  artist 

Something  may  be  said  in  reply  to  these  questions, 
thanks  to  the  investigations  lately  carried  on  by  modern 
critics  and  historians;  but  up  to  the  present  time  there  has 
been  very  little  known  about  him,  and  that  little  errone- 
ous and  confused. 

In  order  to  contribute  my  “grain  of  sand”  and  failing 
to  find  any  new  material  (that  which  I have  looked  for  I 
have  not  had  the  good  fortune  to  find) , I have  consulted 
Diaz  del  Valle,  Palomino,  Cean  Bermudez,  Lafond, 
Madrazo,  Araujo,  Blanc,  Cossio,  Sentenach,  Manjarres, 
Gestoso,  Rodriguez,  Marin,  Symond,  Mier,  Lefort, 
Palomo  Anaya,  F.  N.  L.  Tormo,  Rodriguez  Cordola, 
Justi,  Romero  de  Torres,  Melida,  Villejas,  Alcantara 
and  many  other  biographers  and  critics  of  Art  who  I 
knew  had  written  about  this  illustrious  Extremadurian. 

In  none  of  these  have  I found  a complete  biography, 
such  as  this  painter  merits.  Through  the  certificate  of 
baptism  all  know  when  and  where  he  was  baptised  (not 
the  day  of  his  birth,  for  by  a careless  omission  the  priest 
forgot  to  note  the  date  in  the  corresponding  entry) , but 
none  knew  when  or  where  he  died,  and  certain  periods  of 
his  life  appear  equally  obscure. 

Nevertheless,  by  reading  all  the  authorities,  by  a sys- 

XX 


tematic  arrangement  of  facts,  and  by  force  of  personal 
observation,  we  may  reconstruct  the  life  of  Zurbaran,  re- 
count the  progress  of  his  growth  and  the  influences  he 
received  and  recorded.  It  will  be  necessary  also  to  ex- 
amine the  political,  religious  and  social  state  of  the 
times  in  which  he  was  born  and  developed,  the  artistic 
culture  of  his  epoch,  and  his  most  notable  canvases. 

The  basis  of  my  task  is  to  set  forth  the  judgment  of  his 
contemporaries,  what  he  merits  at  our  hand,  the  errors 
which  his  many  biographers  have  committed  and  his  sig- 
nificance in  the  history  of  Art,  and  this  I propose  to  carry 
out  in  the  most  concise  manner  possible. 

Jose  Cascales  y Munoz. 


XXI 


A 


EDITOR’S  NOTE 


Photographs  of  many  of  the  paintings  reproduced 
herein  have  been  supplied  by  the  Ehrich  Galleries  of 
New  York  and  it  is  a pleasure  to  acknowledge  their  help 
in  this  and  in  other  ways  in  the  preparation  of  this  book. 

The  measurements  of  the  paintings  in  the  text  are 
given  in  millimetres  unless  otherwise  indicated. 

The  small  numerals  in  the  text  refer  to  the  Notes  on 
pages  154-158,  at  the  end  of  the  volume. 


xxiii 


I 


h 


i 


fe- 


“■  1 


I'(JR  I RM  r ()!•  Zl’RI’.ARAX 
Museum  of  firunswirk,  fjcrmaiiy. 


FRANCISCO  DE  ZURBARAN 


LEGENDS 

Although  the  biographers  of  Zurbaran  have 
limited  themselves  to  copying  and  commenting 
upon  the  few  facts  stated  by  Palomino  and 
Cean  Bermudez,  popular  imagination  has  created  a series 
of  legends,  each  more  absurd  and  improbable  than  the 
other. 

In  the  village  of  Fuente  de  Cantos,  his  native  place,  it 
is  still  told  that  he  was  a poor  shepherd  boy  with  such  a 
decided  gift  for  drawing  that,  while  his  flock  was  graz- 
ing, he  drew  upon  the  trunks  of  trees  everything  he  could 
see  about  him,  until  one  day  some  gentlemen  who  were 
passing  through  the  country  admired  his  ability  and  took 
him  with  them  to  Seville.  He  was  then  twelve  years  old 
and  had  received  some  lessons  in  drawing  paid  for  by  the 
priest  of  the  village. 

Before  leaving  Fuente  de  Cantos,  says  another  story, 
he  had  painted  the  caricature  of  a young  aristocrat  named 
Silverio  de  Luarca  who,  offended  by  this  work,  revenged 
himself  upon  the  artist  by  killing  the  elder  Zurbaran, 
then  flying  to  Madrid.  One  night  after  many  years  the 
artist  recognized  him  there  and  killed  him  in  a duel. 

Let  us  see  how  D.  Juan  Jose  Lopez  Serrano,  in  No.  14, 


1 


November,  1899,  of  the  literary  review  “Notes  and 
Sketches”  elaborates  this  fable : 

“Spring  came  with  all  its  attractions.  The  fields  wore 
an  enchanting  aspect;  the  melancholy  foliage  of  winter 
had  changed  to  freshness  and  gaiety,  helping  to  harmon- 
ize the  various  tints  which  carelessly  mingling  appeared 
as  the  capricious  mixture  of  colors  on  a painter’s  palette. 
Many  streams  born  of  the  melting  snow  of  the  mountains 
rushed  through  the  thickets  of  the  woods,  kissing  with 
liquid  lips  the  roots  of  the  walnut-trees  which  shaded 
them. 

“On  such  a Spring  day,  in  the  flowering  season  of  the 
year  1606,  a young  shepherd  called  Francisco  de  Zur- 
baran  was  guarding  his  sheep  in  a field  near  Fuente  de 
Cantos  (province  of  Extremadura) . A boy  of  7,  he  was 
seated  in  the  shade  of  a chestnut-tree,  occupying  his  lei- 
sure by  copying  the  landscape  with  a bit  of  charcoal  on 
an  old  piece  of  paper.  Completely  absorbed  in  his  work 
he  did  not  notice  the  arrival  of  Silverio  de  Luarca,  son  of 
a rich  man  of  Fuente  de  Cantos,  who  with  his  friends  was 
hunting  in  the  vicinity.  Luarca,  who  was  somewhat 
satirical  and  lacking  in  sympathy,  brusquely  asked  the 
little  shepherd : 

“ ‘What  are  you  painting,  boy^’ 

“ ‘I,  sir?’  replied  the  boy;  ‘a  picture  of  the  pasture  and 
my  sheep.’ 

“ ‘Ha,  ha,  why!  The  heads  are  larger  than  the  bodies 
— what  trees!  Go  on  painting  and  you  will  become  a 
great  artist !’ 

“Zurbaran  lowered  his  head,  his  eyes  closed  as  if  he 
feared  to  look  at  the  author  of  so  cruel  a joke;  he  felt  a 
shudder  go  through  him  and  two  tears  escaping  from  his 


2 


THK  CMlI.l)  \ IK(;iX  (( ■(  ).\(  I'.I’TK  »X  ) 

I’roiHity  of  tin-  Ili'irs  of  ll.  Josi-  Maria  I.oiu-z  <!;■  ('01H.TO,  Sovillr. 


/ 


eyes  ran  down  his  cheeks  and  began  to  dampen  the  paper 
which  he  had  thought  a work  of  art,  but  which  had  only 
served  to  amuse  Luarca  and  his  friends. 

“The  years  passed  and  Zurbaran  the  onetime  shepherd 
boy  who  copied  the  fields  and  his  flocks,  painting  the 
heads  bigger  than  the  bodies,  was  now  almost  a master. 
He  had  just  completed  his  twentieth  year  and  since  the 
age  of  twelve  had  been  studying  drawing,  thanks  to  the 
kind  aid  of  the  priest  of  his  birthplace.  A friend  of 
Luarca,  angry  with  him  by  reason  of  some  love  affair,  sent 
to  the  young  artist  to  make  a caricature  inscribed : ‘The 

Enamored  Luarca.’  But  the  latter,  learning  who  was 
the  author  of  it,  went  to  the  house  of  the  painter  and 
found  there  only  his  aged  father,  since  the  son  was  at  that 
time  at  court. 

“ ‘Where  is  your  son?’  asked  Luarca,  infuriated. 

“ ‘Far  from  here,’  replied  the  old  man. 

“ ‘Tell  me  then  who  was  the  author  of  this  sketch?’ 

“ ‘I  cannot  say.’ 

“ ‘You  will  not  tell  me?’ 

“ ‘No!’ 

“ ‘Then  take  this,’  exclaimed  Luarca,  striking  the  ven- 
erable old  man  on  the  head  with  a club.  (He  fell  to 
earth,  his  face  covered  with  blood,  and  died  on  the  fifth 
day  thereafter  in  consequence  of  the  blow.) 

“Imarca  fled  from  the  city  and  took  refuge  in  the  court 
where,  as  he  possessed  great  influence,  he  soon  was  en- 
trusted with  important  matters  by  the  government  of 
Philip  IV. 

“The  clock  in  the  ancient  church  of  the  Holy  Cross  had 


3 


just  struck  eleven  one  night  when  the  famous  painter 
Francisco  de  Zurbaran  was  returning  to  his  home 
wrapped  in  a rich  cloak  of  satin  trimmed  with  Holland 
lace.  As  he  turned  a corner  he  saw  two  men  who  ap- 
peared to  be  persons  of  importance,  and  he  heard  one  say 
as  they  parted : 

“ ‘Adieu,  Luarca,  until  to-morrow.’ 

“This  name  made  a great  impression  upon  Zurbaran, 
bringing  back  to  his  mind  the  cowardly  murder  of  his 
father,  whom  he  seemed  to  hear  crying  for  vengeance. 
He  approached  the  gentleman  so  named,  and,  muffling 
his  face  in  his  cloak,  one  hand  grasping  the  handle  of  his 
rich  sword,  asked  haughtily  : 

“ ‘Are  you  perchance  Silverio  de  Luarca,  native  of 
Fuente  de  Cantos*?’ 

“ ‘I  am,’  replied  his  enemy. 

“ ‘Then, — on  guard, — for  the  blood  of  my  father  de- 
mands blood  and  his  life  cries  for  yours,  cowardly  assas- 
sin! I am  Francisco  de  Zurbaran!’ 

“There  was  a moment’s  pause,  the  cloaks  of  the  two 
duellists  fell  to  the  ground,  and  the  blades  springing 
from  their  sheaths  sounded  sharply  clashing  in  the  keen 
conflict.  The  fight  was  short.  By  the  pale  light  of  the 
moon  half  veiled  by  a thin  nebulous  cloud,  the  face  of 
Zurbaran  was  completely  altered;  his  eyes  flashing  fury 
made  him  appear  the  image  of  Justice.  Suddenly  the 
dull  noise  of  a falling  body  and  of  rapid  footsteps  inter- 
rupted the  silence  of  the  night.  It  was  the  great  artist 
who  managed  the  sword  as  well  as  he  did  the  brush  flying 
from  the  place  where  his  adversary  had  fallen,  who,  with 
superhuman  effort,  in  that  terrible  moment  when  life 
fights  with  death,  shrieked  ‘I  die.’ 


4 


I 111-,  Al’n'l'liroSTS  OF  ST  THOMAS  A(,)riXAS 

I'mvini  i:i  I M us'  Uiii  of  Si  villr. 


\ 


r 


“Zurbaran,  his  slouch  hat  gone,  the  hood  of  his  cape 
rent  open,  his  blade  uncovered,  ran  terror-stricken.  His 
vivid  imagination  measured  with  immense  rapidity  the 
distance  which  separates  the  world  of  the  living  from 
that  of  the  dead.  He  thought  he  saw  the  spirits  of  the 
departed  surround  him  in  a ghastly  dance,  and  over  all, 
in  the  midst  of  them,  the  face  of  his  father  radiant  with 
joy.  Zurbaran  in  this  turmoil  of  mind,  shaken  by  the 
effect  of  such  an  extraordinary  vision,  felt  his  accus- 
tomed strength  forsake  him.  Realizing  it  he  fell  on  his 
knees,  and  in  tremulous  accents  of  mingled  fear  and 
faith,  exclaimed:  ‘Father,  thy  insult  I have  washed 

away  in  blood,  thou  canst  now  rest  tranquilly  in  the  sleep 
of  death.’  ” 

In  consequence  of  this  duel,  adds  the  narrator  of  the 
story,  he  fled  to  Portugal,  where  he  ended  his  days. 

But  in  respect  to  the  motive  of  his  flight  to  Portugal 
(where  he  never  was  so  far  as  is  known),  and  the  cir- 
cumstances of  his  death  another  version  runs  no  less 
falsely. 

It  is  said  that  having  gone  to  his  native  country  with 
the  intention  of  marrying  his  cousin,  he  took  a dislike  to 
a certain  young  man,  a relative,  whom  he  killed  in  a fair 
fight.  The  Inquisition  of  Llerena  having  been  put  in  ac- 
tion in  this  matter,  Zurbaran  fled  to  Portugal,  living  for 
many  years  hidden  in  Lisbon.  He  revealed  his  person 
and  history  only  to  the  monk  who  administered  to  him 
the  rites  of  the  last  sacrament  in  the  hospital  of  St.  Joseph, 
where  he  died  in  1661.^  It  is  said  as  a coincidence  that 
he  died  in  the  same  room,  and  on  the  same  bed  in  which  the 
famous  Camoens  passed  away,  and  that  the  same  monk 


5 


who  confessed  Zurbaran  and  gave  him  the  Viaticum, 
had  previously  aided  the  Lusitanian  poet  to  make  a good 
end  eighty-three  years  before,  which  is  neither  true  nor 
possible. 


6 


THE  INFANT  JESUS  ASLEEP  ON  THE  CROSS 
Museum  of  the  Prado,  Madrid. 


/ 


<4. -I 

t 


THE  EPOCH  OF  ZURBARAN 

A NARRATION  of  facts,  or  a history  of  an  ex- 
clusively personal  character  may  by  the  gen- 
erality of  writers  be  called  a biography,  but  if 
this  is  enough  to  reveal  the  life  of  ordinary  beings,  it  is  in- 
capable of  fully  expressing  the  life  and  accomplishments 
of  men  of  genius.  In  so  far  as  they  represent  the  history, 
the  ideas,  and  other  aspects  of  their  time,  their  life  is 
something  more  general  than  personal,  and,  as  no  bee  can 
make  honey  without  flowers  so  Zurbaran  had  not  been 
Zurbaran  travelling  through  a desert  land.  Far  from 
living  in  a decadent  period,  he  had  the  luck  to  be  born  at 
the  end  of  the  l6th  century;  the  precise  date  cannot  be 
stated,  because  the  certificate  of  baptism  merely  says : 
“In  the  parish  of  Fuente  de  Cantos  on  the  6th  day  of 
November,  1598,  Sr.  Diego  Martinez  Montes,  priest  of 
this  parish,  baptized  a son  of  Luis  de  Zurbaran  and  his 
wife  Isabel  Marquez;  after  having  instructed  his  god- 
father Pedro  Garcia  del  Corro,  priest,  and  the  midwife 
Maria  Dominguez,  that  they  perform  the  parental  duties 
they  had  undertaken,  the  child  was  called  ‘Francisco’  and 
thus  affirms  Diego  Martinez  Montes.” 

According  to  this  Zurbaran  came  into  the  world  when 
Philip  III  occupied  the  throne,  and  lived  in  Madrid  in 
1664  a year  before  the  death  of  Philip  IV.  In  the  Spanish 
society  of  these  two  reigns  Zurbaran  grew  and  developed; 


7 


he  did  not  leave  the  peninsula,  at  least  there  are  no  proofs 
that  he  visited  any  foreign  city.  What  pageants,  what 
great  events  must  not  Zurbaran  have  witnessed  in  his 
childhood  and  adolescence ! How  interesting  the  life  of 
a prince  who  passed  the  time  in  hunting,  in  gambling  and 
religious  festivities,  and  who  found  it  even  necessary  on 
account  of  his  poverty  to  take  an  inventory  of  his  per- 
sonal collection  of  fine  wrought  silver:  He  sent  major- 
domos  and  priests  to  beg  for  him  from  door  to  door,  and 
convoked  and  assembled  the  Cortes  three  times  to  attend 
to  the  necessities  of  the  kingdom.  But  it  was  he  who  put 
Spaniards  into  constant  communication  with  the  other 
peoples  of  Europe  and  America,  through  frequent  wars 
with  the  Netherlands,  England,  Savoy,  Venice,  the  Val- 
tellina,  the  Berbers  and  Turks,  including  the  conquest  of 
Mexico  and  the  valley  of  the  Arauco. 

Zurbaran  could  not  have  been  more  than  twelve  years 
old  at  the  time  of  the  expulsion  of  the  Moors.  He  saw  the 
Inquisition  at  the  height  of  its  power,  and  the  great  influ- 
ence of  the  clergy,  both  lay  and  regular.  The  most  intel- 
lectual minds  flourished  in  the  convents  or  in  their  sha- 
dow. At  this  period  the  beatifications  of  St.  Isidro  Labra- 
dor, St.  Theresa  of  Jesus,  St.  Raymond  of  Penafort,  St. 
Ignatius  of  Loyola  were  celebrated,  and  the  cult  of  the 
Immaculate  Conception  began  to  spread.  Religious  sen- 
timent was  the  dominant  note  of  society.  Was  it  any 
wonder  that  our  artist  was  so  intensely  impressed  that  he 
directed  his  thoughts  to  mystical  subjects,  and  became 
the  most  faithful  interpreter  of  monastic  and  conventual 
life^?  Especially  is  this  true  when  one  takes  into  account 
the  fact  that  while  his  contemporary,  Velasquez,  at  the 
court  was  solicited  to  make  portraits  of  royalties,  and  for 


8 


THE  MRGTX  OF  TEIE  CAVES 
Provincial  iMuseum  of  Cadiz. 


t 


all  kinds  of  worldly  paintings,  Zurbaran  used  his  brushes 
in  Seville  only  for  the  portraits  of  monks  and  scenes  from 
the  lives  of  saints. 

Once  knowing  the  probable  causes  which  led  him  to  be 
a painter  of  religious  subjects,  we  find  it  necessary  to  ex- 
amine the  conditions  which  may  have  influenced  his  style 
and  the  character  of  his  painting. 

In  the  realm  of  politics  and  religion  Spain  offered  the 
aspect  already  described;  in  that  of  the  intellect,  litera- 
ture was  dominated  by  Italian  influence  reaching  perfec- 
tion in  the  romances  of  chivalry  and  the  drama  attaining 
its  highest  point  in  the  books  of  Lope  de  Vega,  and  the 
theatres  of  the  Prince  and  the  Cross.  Among  the  lyric 
poets  were : Rioja,  Rodrigo  Caro,  Juan  de  Jauregui  and 
Luis  de  Argote  y Gongora;  among  epic  poets:  Fray 
Diego  de  Hojeda,  Alonso  de  Acevedo  and  Bernardo  de 
Balbuena;  among  satirists:  Villamendiana,  and  among 
novelists:  Cervantes,  Maeto  Aleman,  Espinel  y Que- 
vedo  who,  at  the  same  time,  distinguished  himself  among 
political  writers  with  Diego  de  Saavedra  Fajardo  and  in 
prose  with  such  a one  as  Rivadeneira. 

Father  Mariana  and  the  Peruvian  Garcilaso  are  re- 
vealed as  masters  of  history,  and  music  reached  great  per- 
fection with  Ortells,  Raban  and  Monteverde. 

If  at  such  a height  the  other  arts  shone  refulgent,  that 
of  painting  could  not  have  much  decayed,  especially 
when  the  sister  arts  of  Architecture  and  Sculpture  pro- 
duced the  masterpieces  of  the  plateresco-style  under  the 
skilful  chisels  of  Berruguete,  Gaspar  Becerra  and  Mar- 
tinez Montanes. 

Raphael  and  Michael  Angelo  being  dead,  the  ideals  of 
the  schools,  which  they  founded,  degenerated  in  their 


9 


disciples  into  routine  and  mannerisms.  Their  insipid 
imitations  could  no  longer  provide  inspiration  for  genius. 
Those  vulgar  classicists  were  quickly  obscured  by  the  nat- 
uralists, the  true  artists,  who  chose  for  their  creations  a 
direct  interpretation  of  real  and  living  things  in  place  of 
the  ideals  of  the  eclectic  schools  of  Italy. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  XVIIth  century,  the  pioneers 
of  neoclassicism  in  Seville  had  died,  and  the  artists  who 
succeeded  them  proceeded  to  forget  such  lessons  and  to 
receive  those  of  Nature  herself.  Among  the  four  acad- 
emies of  Seville,  there  was  only  one  of  the  masters,  Fran- 
cisco Pacheco,  who  busied  himself  in  trying  to  preserve  in 
its  purity  the  Greco-Roman  taste.  As  for  the  other  mas- 
ters: Francisco  de  Herrera  the  Elder — master  of  Velaz- 
quez— and  Juan  del  Castillo — who  taught  Bartolome 
Esteban  Murillo, — they  withdrew  from  it  as  much  as 
they  could,  and  Juan  de  las  Roelas — who  had  studied 
with  Titian  and  seen  the  great  colorists,  Tintoretto  and 
Veronese,  work — also  succeeded  in  freeing  himself  from 
these  artistic  shackles. 


10 


ST.  HUGO  IN  THE  REFECTORY 
Provincial  IMuseuni  of  Seville. 


t 


<■  h 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  ARTIST 


1HAVE  described  in  the  last  chapter  the  atmosphere 
which  the  Extremadurian  youth  breathed  when  he 
arrived  in  the  city  of  Seville,  with  sufficient  knowl- 
edge of  painting  to  work  upon  his  own  account  on  holi- 
days. 

He  was  not  in  Seville  as  a child,  only  as  a well  grown 
youth.  He  did  not  study  under  the  direction  of  Roelas, 
as  has  been  claimed  from  the  time  of  Palomino,  and,  later 
on,  by  all  his  biographers;  he  was  never  inspired  by  the 
works  of  Caravaggio,  to  which  his  own  do  not  show  the 
least  resemblance,  despite  the  opinion  of  some  critics  who 
have  done  nothing  but  repeat,  without  examination,  the 
words  of  the  first  pedant  who,  to  display  his  own  artistic 
culture,  learnedly  compares  the  work  of  a Spaniard  with 
that  of  a stranger. 

The  first  teacher  of  Zurbaran  was  an  humble  artist 
whose  name  until  recently  was  unknown,  and  which  D. 
Francisco  Rodriguez  Marin  has  had  the  good  fortune  to 
discover.  He  found  in  the  Registry  of  Seville  (the  writ- 
ing was  by  Pedro  del  Carpio)  the  consent  given  by  Luis 
de  Zurbaran,  father  of  the  famous  Francisco,  and  a docu- 
ment which  in  its  conclusion  refers  to  the  contract  of  ap- 
prenticeship. The  consent  was  given  in  Fuente  de  Can- 
tos 19th  December,  1613,  and  the  deed  of  apprenticeship 
in  Seville  15th  January,  1614.^ 


The  apprentice  was  then  sixteen  years  old  when  he 
began  to  learn  the  art  of  painting  with  Pedro  Diaz  de 
Villanueva,  a painter  of  images,  for  the  period  of  three 
years  in  which  he  would  teach  him  said  art  according  to 
his  ability^  and  without  concealment  of  any  kind  whatso- 
ever and  in  order  that  he  be  taught  with  best  intentions 
the  master  was  to  receive  sixteen  ducats  paid  in  this  way: 
eight  at  present  and  the  other  eight  at  the  end  of  the  first 
following  year  and  a half. 

From  this  it  is  inferred  as  much  from  the  authorization 
as  from  the  deed,  that  it  was  not  Roelas  nor  any  other,  but 
Pedro  de  Villanueva  whom  Zurbaran  took  for  his  first 
master  in  Seville,  and  it  is  to  be  supposed  that  he  had  con- 
siderable command  of  the  technique  of  his  art  (acquired 
in  his  home  or  some  other  place)  for  it  is  stated  in  the 
document  that  it  is  a condition  that  if  said  Francisco  de 
Zurbaran  desired.,  in  the  said  time  of  three  years,  to  work 
on  holidays,  all  he  should  thus  gain  would  be  for  himself. 

More  puzzling  than  the  artistic  beginnings  of  this 
illustrious  son  of  Extremadura  appear  other  periods  and 
circumstances  of  his  life,  which  we  can  trace  only  by  con- 
sidering the  number,  the  quality  and  dates  of  his  paint- 
ings, and  those  very  few  documents  which  up  to  the 
present  we  have  discovered. 

To  what  may  we  attribute  this  lack  of  popularity  in  a 
painter  so  eminent,  in  spite  of  the  many  proofs  we  pos- 
sess of  the  estimation  in  which  he  was  held  by  his  con- 
temporaries'? 

D.  Edward  Mier  explains  it  as  the  consequence  of  a 
tranquil  life  consecrated  to  Art.  The  life  of  a man  who 
had  inspired  interest  neither  by  his  relationship  with  dis- 
tinguished persons  like  Velasquez,  nor  by  his  misfor- 


12 


Provincial  iMuseum  of  Seville. 


/ 


I 


V 


'i 


tunes  like  Coello,  nor  by  the  vicissitudes  of  destiny  like 
so  many  others  whose  romantic  and  adventurous  exist- 
ence had  contributed  no  little  to  their  fame. 

Francisco  de  Zurbaran  Salazar  ^ “did  not  distinguish 
himself  either  by  his  amorous  adventures  like  Giorgione, 
nor  by  his  duels  and  extravagances  as  did  Caravaggio 
and  Alonso  Cano,  nor  by  his  stupidity  like  Claude  Lor- 
raine, or  the  Raphael  of  the  cats,  nor  by  his  crimes  like 
Andres  Castagno,  the  celebrated  prisoner  of  the  galleys.”  ® 

I take  the  liberty  of  believing  that  (apart  from  the 
reasons  given  by  Sr.  Mier)  the  century  which  followed 
that  of  Zurbaran  was  not  the  most  propitious  to  enhance 
the  reputation  of  a painter  of  monks  and  saints;  people 
at  that  time  did  not  concern  themselves  with  investigat- 
ing or  writing  down  the  particulars  of  his  life,  in  order  to 
transmit  to  posterity  an  harmonious  biography,  and  the 
results  of  this  are  the  ignorance  and  the  errors  which  we 
now  lament. 

The  first  studies  of  this  master  (who  for  the  remainder 
of  his  life  never  painted  except  from  the  model,  neither 
copied  except  with  a manikin  or  a living  figure)  showed 
like  those  of  the  author  of  The  Spmners  the  effects  of 
everything  being  studied  directly  from  nature,  abstain- 
ing absolutely  from  all  conventions  or  traditions  of  the 
schools. 

If  not  the  first  of  his  works,  the  oldest  at  least  of  those 
we  have  to-day  (now  owned  by  the  heirs  of  D.  Jose  Marfa 
Lopez  Cepero  of  Seville)  is  signed  1616,  when  the  artist 
had  completed  his  eighteenth  year,  and  had  terminated 
the  period  of  scholarship  which  since  January,  1614,  he 
had  received,  according  to  contract,  from  Pedro  Diaz  de 
Villanueva. 


13 


D.  Ellas  Tormo  has  written  in  No.  19,679  of  La  Epoca  ^ 
the  following  words  in  regard  to  the  subject  of  the  paint- 
ing, and  the  authenticity  of  the  signature : “The  picture 

is  an  Immaculate  Conception,  in  which  by  a happy  inspi- 
ration (and  it  is  quite  as  possible  that  this  is  due  as  much 
to  the  artist  himself  as  to  some  learned  friend  who  inspired 
it)  he  represents  Mary  as  very  young,  held  in  space  by  a 
delicious  group  of  heads  of  eight  young  cherubim,  and 
worshipped  and  sung  to,  beneath,  by  thirteen  small  nude 
angels  (a  narrow  scarf  is  lightly  thrown  about  them)  who 
read  the  music  in  their  hands,  raising  their  silvery  voices 
and  accompanied  only  by  the  tones  of  the  trumpet  which 
one  of  them  is  playing.  This  group  is  a beautiful  com- 
position which  recalls  many  Italian  works,  from  the  sculp- 
tures of  Donatello  and  Della  Robbia  to  the  celebrated 
design  by  Pordenone  preserved  in  Florence. 

“Mary  is  dressed  in  the  style  already  de  rigueur  in  Spain 
in  1616,  in  a white  tunic;  a large  blue  mantle  is  draped 
about  her.  Her  look,  directed  heavenward,  seems  to  be 
inspired  and  mystical,  and  the  expression  of  the  chil- 
dren’s heads  delicate;  but  the  hard  although  studied  and 
scrupulous  drawing  of  the  author  did  not  attain  the  de- 
sired effect,  neither  did  the  artist  render  completely  the 
celestial  environment  of  the  original  figure  of  the  Im- 
maculate, with  the  golden  tones  of  the  luminous  clouds. 

“As  to  the  authenticity  of  the  signature  which  some 
may  question,  I do  not  argue  on  behalf  of  its  truth,  nor 
do  I feel  any  doubt  whatever  that  the  painting  was 
signed  as  the  paper  attached  to  it  proves.  This  peculiar- 
ity of  being  written  in  script,  instead  of  the  printing  which 
Zurbaran  used  afterwards,  in  some  of  the  few  signed 
works  we  know,  was  not  so  rare  that  some  similar  one 


14 


I III-,  ciiii.i)  ji-.M  S ix.irRi:!)  l!^■  I III-.  I HORNS 
( 'ollrctioii  (if  I).  ('ayclano  Saiuluv  I’iiu-ila,  Seville. 


4 


T- 


t 

i 

I 


should  not  have  been  known,  such  as  the  Apotheosis  of 
St.  Thomas^  signed  and  dated  1631.  That  of  1616 
would  show,  if  it  were  false,  a bold  effrontery  on  the  part 
of  the  author  of  the  forgery,  since  the  picture  is  not  in 
the  characteristic  style  of  Zurbaran,  and  at  first  glance 
one  could  always  suspect  the  handwriting  which  corre- 
sponds in  sharpness  and  fluency  to  the  period  of  Philip 
III. 

“Finally,  it  is  not  wholly  improbable  that  Zurbaran 
should  have  painted  the  work  ordered  by  Sr.  Cepero 
seven  years  before  the  pictures  of  the  Marquis  of  Mala- 
gon. 

The  unusual  part  of  it  is  that  there  are  no  records  of 
the  other  works  which  he  undoubtedly  executed  after  the 
completion  of  this  Immaculate  Conception  and  a precious 
Child  Virgin  owned  by  D.  Aureliano  de  Beruete,  and 
about  the  time  that  he  engaged  to  paint  nine  new  and 
grand  compositions  taken  from  the  life  of  St.  Peter  which 
the  same  Marquis  of  Malagon  had  ordered  for  the  high 
altar  of  the  Apostle  in  the  Sevillian  cathedral,  called 
finished  in  1623,  which  revealed  Zurbaran  as  a great 
colorist  and  a consummate  designer,  while  yet  Philip  IV 
reigned,  enthusiastic  protector  not  only  of  bullfighters, 
clowns  and  courtesans,  but  also  and  chiefly  of  Arts  and 
Letters. 

Foreign  troubles  and  national  disasters  embittered  the 
life  of  the  monarch,  together  with  wars  in  Holland, 
France  and  England;  with  revolts  in  Catalonia  and 
Naples;  with  the  freedom  of  the  Valtellina  and  the  inde- 
pendence of  Portugal.  Autos  de  fe  like  those  of  Madrid, 
Valladolid,  Cordoba  and  Seville  darkened  the  cheerful- 
ness of  those  cities.  Nevertheless  Lope  de  Vega  was 


15 


writing  and  at  the  height  of  their  fame  were  Tirso  de 
Molina,  Ruiz  de  Alarcon,  Rojas,  Zorrilla,  Calderon, 
Moreto,  Velez  de  Guevara,  Gongora,  Villamediana,  the 
Argensolas,  Mariana,  Quevedo  and  a hundred  more,  all 
men  of  eminent  genius  who,  I believe,  enjoyed  the  royal 
favor. 

In  regard  to  the  conduct  of  this  king  toward  artists, 
James  Fitzmaurice-Kelly  says:  “Science  and  letters 
were  his  constant  preoccupation  and  he  was  not  destitute 
of  personal  gifts.  He  was  not  content  merely  to  give  in- 
structions to  his  ministers  to  buy  every  good  picture  that 
was  offered  them  in  foreign  markets;  his  own  sketches 
show  that  he  had  profited  by  watching  Velasquez  paint. 
It  is  no  small  glory  for  him  to  have  divined  by  a single 
glance  the  genius  of  the  unknown  Sevillian  master,  and 
to  have  appointed  him  when  scarcely  nineteen  years  old 
to  be  his  special  painter.  He  indeed  recommended  Zur- 
baran  to  Alonso  Cano  to  get  a canon’s  place  for  him  in 
Granada.  . . . 

“He  even  detained  the  course  of  justice  to  protect  an 
artist.  Thus  when  the  master  of  Velasquez,  the  half- 
crazy Herrera,  was  accused  of  falsifying  money,  the  mon- 
arch intervened  making  the  observation : ‘Remember  his 

St.  Hermengildo!”  ® 

If  the  literary  culture  of  his  contemporaries  helped  to 
make  Zurbaran  an  illustrious  man,  if  the  religious  ideas 
of  the  society  in  which  he  lived  inclined  him  to  mysticism, 
and  if  the  popular  taste  in  painting  drove  him  to  natural- 
ism, his  mind  was  no  little  influenced  (as  a stimulant  to 
progress)  by  the  patronage  of  Philip  IV  to  those  of  high 
achievement. 

After  completing  the  paintings  for  the  altar  of  St.  Peter 


i6 


rill-;  iior.v  I'ACK 

( '(ilK'i  licin  of  1 I.  M.iriano  I’acli'-io,  Madrid, 


4 


' 1 


r. 


\ 


I 


the  Apostle,  he  went  from  Seville  to  Extremadura  and 
established  himself  in  Llerena  from  which  place  he  was 
promptly  invited  to  return  to  the  Andalusian  capital  to 
paint  those  pictures  which  are  collected  in  the  cloister  of 
the  convent  of  the  Merced  Calzada^  representing  the  life 
of  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  and  the  Crucifixion  of  the  convent 
of  St.  Peter  of  which  Cean  Bermudez  said  it  seejned 
sculpture.  These  last  were  finished  in  1629,  and  such 
was  the  reputation  Zurbaran  gained  by  them  that  the 
Council  of  the  city  in  which  the  famous  artist  flour- 
ished asked  officially  that  he  would  not  again  leave,  but 
consent  to  remain  as  an  honor  to  the  place.  This  very 
singular  act  for  a Spanish  city  Council  which  was  well 
known  to  Palomino  ® — the  first  writer  who  refers  to  it — 
has  been  denied  with  ver)^  plausible  reasons  by  Cean  Ber- 
mudez who  could  not  explain  it. 

“It  is  a glory  to  this  famous  man  who  having  retired  to 
live  in  Fuente  de  Cantos — his  native  place — that  the  city 
of  Seville  sent  a deputation,  asking  his  consent  to  return 
and  live  there,  thus  honoring  her  with  his  person  and 
genius;  and  as  there  were  already  in  the  city  many  other 
celebrated  painters,  he  could  thus  see  how  great  an  honor 
was  conferred  upon  him.” 

Cean  Bermudez  observed  that  “it  does  not  appear  cer- 
tain or  even  probable  as  stated  by  Palomino  that  Zur- 
baran having  retired  to  live  in  Fuente  de  Cantos  the  civil 
Council  of  Seville  should  send  a deputation  to  the  end 
that  he  might  return  and  re-establish  himself  in  that  city. 
Since  no  painting  from  his  hand  has  been  found  in  Fuente 
de  Cantos,  neither  any  references  in  the  records  of  his 
parish  relative  to  his  residence,  from  whence  he  went 
when  very  young;  and  besides  the  Council  of  Seville  had 


no  need  to  honor  so  extraordinarily  a stranger,  when  she 
abounded  in  good  and  excellent  native  painters,  more 
than  the  other  cities  of  the  kingdom.” 

Perhaps  the  admirers  of  the  stranger  knew  that  none, 
or  very  few  of  those  good  and  excellent  native  painters 
shone  to  his  degree  in  the  representation  of  religious  sub- 
jects, because  the  fact  of  the  matter  is  that  Zurbaran  did 
not  go  to  Fuente  de  Cantos  but  to  Llerena  as  is  stated, 
and  he  did  not  do  so  without  the  protest  of  the  Sevillian 
artists. 

This  is  the  truth  of  the  occurrence.  Called  to  Madrid 
by  the  monks  of  the  Mercy  and  when  he  had  already 
finished  the  works  which  they  engaged  from  him  and  the 
Crucifixion  of  the  sacristy  of  St.  Paul  on  the  27th  June, 
1629,  Sr.  Rodrigo  Suarez,  alderman,  offered  a note  to  the 
civil  Council  of  Seville  proposing  that  in  view  of  the 
consummate  art"  which  had  been  shown  ‘‘"in  these  works 
and  presupposing  that  painting  is  not  the  least  ornament 
of  a republic,”  asks  that  the  said  “Francisco  Zurbaran 
may  be  invited  to  live  here  without  salary  or  aid  for  his 
expenses  ...”  at  least  in  words  to  the  effect  that  he 
would  make  his  home  there,  and  that  this  one  step  would 
be  sufficient  to  make  the  offer  effective.  Signing  this  re- 
quest were  D.  Antonio  de  Bobadilla,  Alderman,  D.  Pedro 
Galindo  de  Abreu,  Alderman,  and  chief  prosecutor,  and 
D.  Diego  Caballero  Illesca. 

This  was  agreed  upon  by  the  city  and  by  D.  Diego  F. 
de  Mendoza,  chief  officer  of  justice,  and  Sr.  Rodrigo 
Suarez  was  directed  to  tell  Zurbaran  how  much  the  city 
wished  he  might  go  and  live  there,  “/<9r  the  good  opinion 
they  had  formed  of  his  person,  and  that  the  city  offered 
him  whatever  favor  or  help  it  possibly  could.” 


18 


Zurbaran  had  to  accept  at  once,  but  a protest  was  soon 
offered. 

On  Wednesday,  May  29,  1630,  there  was  posted  in 
the  civil  palace  a petition  from  Alonso  Cano,  painter, 
protesting  against  this  proposition  and  pretending  that 
the  city  should  demand  that  Francisco  de  Zurbaran  be 
examined  as  by  what  license  he  exercises  his  art. 

The  Extremadurian  artist  refused  to  submit  to  such 
an  examination  and  knowing  how  to  defend  himself  made 
the  statement  ''that  having  been  in  Llerena  to  paint  the 
sacristy  of  the  convent  of  St.  Paul  and  the  pictures  of  the 
cloister  of  Our  Lady  of  Mercy,  the  city  had  consented  to 
send  him  the  assistant  to  ask  him  to  come  to  Seville  and 
establish  himself  there;  and  that  it  would  be  a distinc- 
tion for  her  if  he  would  accept  the  offer,  and  the  city  con- 
sidered that  she  would  be  favored  by  his  presence  which 
would  enhance  her  lustre  and  the  zvorks  of  her  churches; 
and  he,  recognizing  such  honor,  and  in  spite  of  all  incon- 
veniences, left  his  home  and  went  to  Seville.’’’ 

In  the  same  year,  1629,  in  which  Zurbaran  finished  the 
decoration  of  the  sacristy  of  St.  Paul  and  the  pictures  of 
the  Merced  Calzada  (a  part  of  which  was  the  Apparition 
of  St.  Peter  the  Apostle  to  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  bearing  this 
date  and  preserved  in  Museum  of  the  Prado)  he  painted 
for  the  Carthusian  Order  of  St.  Mary  of  the  Caves  the 
Virgin  protecting  the  monks  under  her  mantle,  the 
Miracle  of  St.  Hugo,  the  Coijference  of  St.  Bruno  with 
Pope  Urban  II,  and  the  Child  Jesus  wound  ’mg  Flimself 
weaving  a crown  of  thorns,  belonging  to  Sr.  Sanchez 
Pineda  of  Seville,  and  the  canvases  of  the  church  of  St. 
Buenaventura  to  which  collection  belonged  that  now  in 
the  Museum  of  Berlin,  St.  Buenaventura  visited  by 


19 


SL  Thomas  and  its  companions  in  Dresden  and  the 
Louvre. 

The  Blessed  Alonso  Rodriguez  of  the  Academy  of  San 
Fernando  was  signed  in  1630,  and  in  1631,  the  Holy 
Face  which  D.  Mariano  Pacheco  owns  in  Madrid  and  the 
Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  of  the  Museum  of 
Seville  which  Zurbaran  painted  for  the  conventual  col- 
lege of  the  Angel  of  the  Schools. 

This  last  was  considered  to  be  the  finest  of  his  paint- 
ings, and  is  without  any  doubt  the  most  noted  and  the  best 
proportioned  of  the  many  that  came  from  his  palette.  I 
need  not  add  a description  of  my  own  to  the  many  which 
have  been  written  about  this  immense  canvas.  Choosing 
from  them  all  I limit  myself  to  the  one  by  my  friend  D. 
Narciso  Sentenach  y Cabanas  who  says:  “In  a glory 
that  recalls  that  of  Roelas,  our  artist  represents  St. 
Thomas  standing  in  an  attitude  of  inspiration  with  a book 
in  one  hand  and  a pen  in  the  other;  surrounding  him, 
seated,  are  the  four  Holy  Fathers  who  hold  large  books 
and  talk  among  themselves,  while  the  angelic  Doctor 
seems  to  preach,  abridge  and  place  in  order  his  original 
thoughts,  putting  them  in  scholastic  form  to  found  his 
philosophy.  Some  angels  appear  enhancing  the  glory  of 
the  background.  Overlooking  the  scene  from  one  corner 
are  Christ  and  St.  Mary,  and  from  the  other  St.  Peter  and 
St.  Dominic;  meanwhile  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  form  of  a 
dove  diffuses  its  light  over  the  figure  of  the  Saint.  In 
the  lower  half  of  this  colossal  canvas  beside  a rug,  and 
kneeling  upon  rich  cushions  of  wrought  tapestry,  are  the 
Emperor,  Charles  V,  high  protector  of  the  college,  and 
Archbishop  Deza.  Back  of  him,  also  kneeling,  are  three 
friars  and  behind  the  shoulder  of  the  Emperor  are  several 


20 


s'-?' 


gentlemen,  among  whom  we  recognize  the  portrait  of  the 
artist. 

“St.  Thomas  with  uncovered  head  is  dressed  in  the 
habit  of  his  order;  the  Holy  Fathers  with  the  exception 
of  the  Cardinal  who  wears  his  appropriate  robes,  are 
wrapped  in  gorgeous  copes  of  gold  brocade  embroidered 
with  ornamental  designs  marvelously  executed;  the  em- 
peror, bearing  the  imperial  crown  and  dressed  in  black 
armor,  displays  upon  his  shoulders  a stiff  cape  of  cloth  of 
gold  that  stands  out  from  the  figure ; the  lights  are  reflected 
in  the  profusely  pleated  mozetto  of  satin  and  in  the  white 
rochet  worn  by  the  Archbishop  of  Seville.  Light  floods 
the  heads  and  the  habits  of  the  monks ; it  is  reflected  in  the 
tissue  and  brocade  of  the  rich  capes,  shining  in  the  metals, 
opalescent  in  the  velvet,  diffused  through  the  delicate 
white  rochets,  revealing  the  most  refined  details.  In  the 
midst  of  this  light,  of  these  tones  of  claro-obscuro,  of  this 
dazzling  splendor  reigns  the  calm  correctness  of  those 
noble  figures,  their  majesty,  their  attitude,  their  studied 
details,  nothing  vague,  nothing  confused,  but  altogether 
finished,  distinct  and  magnificently  executed. 

“Zurbaran  showed  in  this  work  a temperament  morally 
equivalent  to,  and  harmonious  with  the  saint  he  repre- 
sented, and  whose  personality  he  so  thoroughly  under- 
stood. The  great  Christian  philosopher  has  never  had  a 
better  plastic  interpreter.” 

This  picture  with  its  figures  more  than  life-size  is  now 
in  the  provincial  Museum  of  Seville,  after  having  with- 
stood, as  Madrazo  says,  innumerable  vicissitudes  which 
fortunately  did  nothing  more  than  to  extend  the  fame  of 
its  author  throughout  cultured  Europe. 

When  they  began  to  line  the  canvas  preparatory  to  put- 


21 


ting  it  in  its  present  place,  Villegas,  a young  student 
of  art,  now  director  of  the  Prado  Museum,  was  copy- 
ing it  and  finished  his  work — a sketch  which  was 
shown  at  the  Exhibition  at  Madrid  in  1905.  On  this 
account,  Villegas  witnessed  the  task  undertaken  by 
the  restorer  Alarcon  to  remove  the  boards  which  covered 
the  back  of  the  canvas.  At  the  same  time,  they  both 
noticed,  with  the  greatest  surprise,  a paper  fastened  to 
the  cloth  and  upon  which  the  following  story  was  written : 
“This  canvas  was  taken  out  of  the  chapel  of  the  college 
by  two  collegians,  during  the  invasion  of  the  French 
which  occurred  in  February,  18 10.  The  French  took 
possession  of  it  afterwards  and  placed  it  in  the  Royal 
Alcazar  of  this  city.  In  their  flight  which  was  27th  Au- 
gust, 1812,  they  carried  it  to  Paris,  from  whence  it  re- 
turned to  Madrid  where  it  remained  until  the  year  1818, 
when  Ferdinand  VII  gave  it  to  the  college,  and  it  was 
placed  over  the  altar  16th  January,  1819,  Master  Father 
Juan  Gomez  Muriel  being  rector.” 

When  the  discovery  of  this  note  took  place.  Dr.  Ramon 
de  Beas  y Dutari  was  consulted. He  was  professor  in 
the  faculty  of  Law  of  this  literary  university,  and  had  in 
his  youth  assisted  in  the  college  of  St.  Thomas  and  seen 
the  paper  placed  between  the  before  mentioned  canvas 
and  the  board.  This  gentleman  recognized  it  and  verified 
it  as  being  the  same  paper  written  by  Master  Father  Juan 
Zara,  which  had  been  read  in  the  presence  of  the  commun- 
ity and  Sr.  Beas,  some  moments  before  putting  it  in  the 
position  where  it  was  found.  He  also  stated  that  he 
well  remembered  that  through  the  mediation  of  the  doc- 
toral of  Toledo,  1).  Joaquin  Abarca,  afterwards  Bishop 
of  Leon  and  resident  of  Court,  Master  Father  Joaquin 


nil'.  \iR('.ix  oi'  'nn.  K<)SAR^ 

Hospital  of  the  Klood,  Seville. 


t 


I 


Aguilar,  having  gone  for  the  purpose  to  Madrid  and  over- 
coming great  difficulties,  obtained  from  King  Ferdi- 
nand VII  the  restitution  of  the  painting  to  the  college 
in  1818.  On  26th  January,  1819,  it  was  placed  in  its 
position  in  the  chapel  of  the  college  for  which  the  frame 
was  made  that  remains  today  (restored  of  late)  because 
the  old  one  was  of  gypsum  and  fastened  to  the  wall.  In 
1821  it  was  removed  from  the  college,  which  was  closed 
and  united  with  the  convent  of  St.  Hyacinth  of  Triana. 
The  picture  was  taken  out  through  an  opening  which  had 
to  be  made  in  the  wall  of  the  chapel  facing  the  little 
square,  and  from  there  it  was  deposited  in  the  cathedral. 
The  constitutional  system  being  abolished  in  1823,  the 
college  recovered  its  former  location  and  took  back  the 
canvas,  introducing  it  through  the  same  opening  in  the 
wall  whence  it  had  gone  out,  and  then  it  was  strengthened 
with  boards  at  the  back.  The  rector  of  the  college. 
Father  Juan  de  Zara,  wrote  the  inscription  on  the  paper 
with  his  own  hand  and  placed  it  where  it  was  found,  as 
above  mentioned.  Sr.  Beas  adds  that  Zurbaran  having 
been  dissatisfied  with  the  payment  he  received  from  the 
chapter  of  the  cathedral  for  the  picture  of  St.  Peter,  took 
special  pains  to  excel  this  painting  with  the  picture  of 
St.  Thomas  which  he  executed  shortly  after. Sr.  Beas 
had  often  heard  that  the  college  had  paid  for  their  canvas 
the  sum  of  30,000  reales.  The  information  had  been 
transmitted  by  tradition. 

The  paintings  in  the  convent  of  the  Mercy  must  have 
been  done  five  years  after  Sf.  Thomas  and  the  Holy 
Face,  or  perhaps  in  1636,  judging  by  a preceding  one,  the 
St.  Lawrence,  which  is  owned  by  the  Museum  of  the  Her- 
mitage of  St.  Petersburg.  That  of  the  Carthusians  of 


23 


Jerez  and  the  Hercules  of  the  Buen  Retiro  were  executed 
from  1633  to  1638.  To  the  first  of  these  dates,  1633, 
Sr.  Salvador  Viniegra  ascribes  another  work:  the  Ador- 
ation of  the  Shepherds^  now  in  the  National  Gallery  of 
London,  today  attributed  to  Zurbaran,  but  hitherto  held 
to  be  a Velasquez.  About  this  picture,  adds  Sr.  Viniegra 
in  his  extensive  discussion,  rages  the  battle  of  Art  and 
History. 

Art  says  it  belongs  to  Zurbaran,  History  affirms  it  to  be 
a Velasquez.  Which  is  right*? 

This  work  belonged  to  one  of  the  Counts  of  Aguila; 
he  sold  it  to  Mr.  Tailor  and  he,  in  turn,  to  Louis  Philippe 
and  it  figured  in  this  king’s  collection  in  the  Louvre,  until 
the  latter  was  sold  and  the  picture  bought  by  the  National 
Gallery.  In  1786  its  possessor  was  the  Count  of  Aguila, 
D.  Miguel  de  Espina  Maldonado  Saavedra,  etc.  In  an 
inventory  made  before  the  notary  public  D.  Juan  Ber- 
nardo Moran,  February  nth  of  the  same  year,  and  on 
pages  58  and  59  it  is  stated  in  this  manner : and  another 
large  picture  of  the  Birth  of  Our  Redeemer.  Its  author 
Velasquez.  . . . 

Art  says  today  that  it  is  a Zurbaran.  Will  History  suc- 
ceed in  changing  its  authorship  to  Velasquez? 

In  this  interesting  artistic  problem,  Zurbaran  has  the 
advantage  of  being  taken  for  the  king  of  painters.  Nor 
is  this  picture  the  only  one  in  which  they  are  confused; 
the  portrait  of  the  Cordobian  poet,  Luis  de  Gongora 
(catalogued  in  the  Prado  as  No.  1085)  begins  to  be  an 
object  of  discussion,  sustained  by  many  as  painted  by 
Zurbaran  and  not  by  Velasquez  on  his  first  visit  to 
Madrid.  As  to  the  controversy  about  the  resemblance 
which  some  critics  find  between  certain  works  of  Velas- 


24 


n;sus  m.i:ssix(;  thk  woki.d 

Itiirbe  Collection,  Madrid. 


i 


quez  and  those  of  Zurbaran,  I have  copied  here  these 
statements  of  Sr.  Viniegra,  and  as  to  the  doubts  which  he 
expresses,  they  have  already  disappeared  thanks  to  the 
very  happy  intervention  of  our  illustrious  compatriot, 
D.  Aureliano  de  Beruete  who,  from  1898  and  since  then, 
considers  the  disputed  picture  in  the  National  Gallery 
not  to  be  by  Velasquez,  but  the  work  of  Zurbaran.  We 
cannot  omit  the  following  curious  resemblance  between 
the  two  masters  which  Sr.  Tormo  y Monzo  has  remarked 
in  an  article  published  in  La  Epoca  entitled : “The  bold 
coloring  of  Zurbaran,  repeated  afterwards  by  Velas- 
quez.” 

“The  best  portrait  of  any  Pope  which  one  may  see  in 
Rome  is  that  of  Innocent  X (of  the  Pamphili-Doria  fam- 
ily) . It  is  the  pearl  of  the  gallery  at  the  Dorian  palace. 
It  was  the  gift  of  the  Court  painter  of  His  Catholic 
Majesty  to  His  Holiness  Innocent  X,  according  to  the 
autograph  of  Velasquez  on  the  paper  which  the  Pontiff 
holds  in  his  left  hand.  By  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds,  the 
great  English  painter,  it  was  considered  the  best  can- 
vas in  Rome;  by  Beruete,  who  recalls  this  opinion,  it  is 
the  work  that  inaugurates  the  third  and  last  manner  of 
Velasquez,  the  ripeness  of  his  talent  and  shows  the  mas- 
ter in  full  possession  of  all  the  mysteries  of  his  art  and  is 
perhaps  the  one  of  them  most  frequently  discussed. 
“The  face  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  although  expressive, 
is  frankly  ugly.  The  reddish  tone,  rather  violet  colored, 
reveals  the  sanguine  temperament  of  the  model.  The 
short  cape  is  red  like  the  calotte,  the  chair  and  the 
curtains  in  the  background.  This  rich  harmony  of  the 
reds  contrasts  with  the  white  of  the  collar,  the  sleeves  and 
the  rochet.  The  contours  and  tone  of  the  hands,  espe- 


dally  the  right  one,  are  not  in  harmony  with  the  face  and 
the  coloring  of  the  sitter. 

“What  antecedents  has  this  picture  among  the  works 
of  Velasquez'? 

“What  precedents  for  this  marvelous  harmony  of  red 
tones,  symphonically  contrasted — if  I may  use  the  phrase 
— with  the  other  harmony  of  the  whites?  Absolutely 
none,  in  my  opinion.  Velasquez  was  an  all  powerful 
painter  and  could  give  himself  to  momentary  inspiration, 
and  he  might,  without  doubt,  have  done  so  in  this  theme 
of  red  upon  red  and  joined  to  red,  contrasting  strongly 
with  whites  no  less  decided  and  striking;  even  the  right 
hand  reflects  white  from  the  white  of  the  rochet. 

“Nevertheless,  who  could  have  suggested  to  Velasquez 
the  audacity  of  red  of  which  this  picture  is  a triumphant 
example? 

“Perhaps  he  knew  that  his  friend  Zurbaran  had  once 
felt  tempted  to  try  a similar  effect,  and  possibly  with 
greater  decision,  when  he  painted  a single  red  figure. 
The  work  is  preserved  in  the  Museum  of  Seville.  It  is  a 
SL  Gregory  standing,  pontifically  dressed  and  reading  a 
book,^ — as  one  of  the  four  Fathers  of  the  Western 
Church. 

“I  ignore  the  precedence  of  those  four  paintings  in 
which  the  theme  of  red  is  the  leading  motive  of  the  work; 
but  in  none  of  them  is  there  such  exclusiveness,  daring 
and  success  as  in  the  portrait  of  this  particular  Holy 
Bishop  of  Rome. 

“The  truth  is  that  here  (and  not  in  the  Velasquez  at 
Rome)  the  background  is  a deep  grey,  but  in  contrast  the 
cope  is  red,  red  the  soutane,  red  the  wide  and  simple  stole, 
a vivid  red  tlie  edges  of  the  pages  of  the  book  which  is 


26 


FATHER  (;<)N/.ALO  ]LL]-.S('AS 
Monastery  of  Guachlui)c, 


I 


1 


I 


much  foreshortened,  red  shows  in  the  spots  of  color  on  the 
gauntleted  hands,  the  visible  border  of  the  calotte  is  red 
and  finally  the  reflections  of  the  sanguine  temperament 
and  the  face  of  the  Saint  are  red;  the  golden,  pontifical 
tiara  itself  appears  reddened.  By  strong  contrast  the 
most  daring  whites,  characteristic  of  Zurbaran,  seem  to 
challenge  one  another  in  the  rochet  and  short  alb,  the  end 
of  the  short  sleeves  (especially  on  the  left  wrist),  the 
visible  part  of  the  book,  the  grey  hairs  in  the  mustache 
and  the  beard  which  is  already  whitening.  The  old  gold 
in  the  border  of  the  cape  (as  in  the  same  white  tone  and 
the  yellowing  mantle  of  one  of  the  side  figures,  that  of 
St.  Peter)  and  the  yellow  of  the  parchment  binding  of  the 
volumes  are  light  notes  of  color  placed  there  only  for  the 
purpose  of  underlining  the  effects  of  the  great  masses. 
If  it  is  added  that  the  figure  is  well  constructed  and  that 
the  head,  admirably  modelled  from  life  and  frankly 
drawn,  is  of  a singular  and  striking  truth,  no  one  will 
wonder  if  I say  that  this  work,  of  a single  figure,  is  one  of 
the  most  powerful  of  Zurbaran’s  paintings. 

“There  is  an  extraordinary  interest  attached  to  the 
problem  of  the  chronological  priority  of  the  work  on  these 
canvases.  That  of  Velasquez  corresponds  to  the  year 
1650,  when  Zurbaran  had  finally  left  Andalusia  and  was 
completing  the  last  years  of  his  life  in  Madrid — I venture 
to  say  when  he  had  changed  his  style.  In  regard  to  the 
SL  Gregory^  wholly  ignoring  the  date  of  the  picture,  I 
may  without  the  least  scruple  suppose  it  to  be  of  about 
the  year  1631.  The  reason  is  clear  and  very  evident. 
The  Gregory^  like  the  other  three  Holy  Fathers,  its 
companions,  by  the  similarity  of  style,  the  method  and 
manner  of  the  parts  resembling  those  of  the  great  picture 


27 


of  the  Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  are  either  the 
preliminary  studies  in  the  preparation  of  the  great  work 
of  the  master  (to  which  opinion  I am  inclined)  or  they  are 
the  immediate  consequence  of  that  labor;  works  incarna- 
dined with  the  same  color  and  of  almost  at  the  same 
period  (1631).  Through  mere  aesthetic  judgment,  I 
would  believe  that  the  great  picture  is  later  by  six  years 
than  this  date,  but  by  no  means  more.  . . . 

“In  the  marvelous  drawing  of  these  character  heads,  as 
in  the  technique  of  color — the  red  tones, — the  painting 
of  St.  Thomas  is  an  indisputable  companion  of  the  St. 
Gregory.,  painted  between  1630  and  1640. 

“Returning  to  my  theme,  I believe  it  can  be  proved 
then  as  a decided  fact  that  the  Innocent  X of  Velasquez, 
of  16^0,  was  suggested  by  the  fame  of  the  daring  works  of 
Zurbaran  created  quite  a number  of  years  previously.”  I 
also  venture  to  state  that  the  other  works  executed  by 
Zurbaran  were  not  few  in  number,  while  he  was  occupied 
with  the  paintings  this  community  had  ordered. 

In  the  same  year,  1638,  in  which  he  finished  for  Jerez 
an  Adoration  of  the  Shepherds  (identical  with  that  in  the 
National  Gallery)  and  which  he  signed  as  Painter  to  the 
King.,  he  spent  a few  months  on  the  decorations  for  the 
Ship  of  the  Holy  King  Ferdinand.^" 

The  signature  by  Zurbaran  as  Painter  to  the  King,  in 
the  above  mentioned  canvas  of  the  Carthusian  monastery 
of  Jerez,  caused  D.  Salvador  Viniegra  to  say  (coinciding 
with  many  others  who  had  written  about  the  work)  : 
“What  special  credit  had  he  actually  won  to  obtain  this 
high  distinction?  Neither  had  he  been  at  Court  nor  exe- 
cuted royal  orders,  and  his  works  were  hidden  away  in  the 
convents  and  churches  of  Seville  and  Jerez?” 


28 


THE  CELESTIAL  CHASTISE:MEXT  OE  ST-  JEROME 
Monastery  of  Guadalupe. 


r 

I 


In  regard  to  his  never  having  been  at  Court,  I do  not 
dispute  it,  since  I have  no  proofs  either  for  or  against, 
but  that  he  had  not  executed  any  royal  commands  before 
1638  is  a gratuitous  statement,  which  has  been  repeated 
by  all  the  biographers  of  Zurbaran,  as  they  were  ignorant 
of  an  interesting  document  unknown  until  1911,  which 
has  been  examined  and  produced  by  Sr.  Tormo  in  Vol. 
19,  pages  38  to  43  of  the  Bulletin  of  the  Spanish  Society 
of  Research}^  This  document  is  a description  of  the 
Salon  of  the  palace  of  Buen  Retiro  by  a poet  of  the  time 
of  Philip  IV. 

“The  poet,”  writes  Sr.  Tormo,  “Manuel  Gallegos  by 
name  and  a Portuguese  by  nativity,  wrote  his  verses  by 
order  of  D.  Diego  Suarez,  Secretary  of  State  and  Coun- 
cillor of  Portugal,  and  they  were  published  quite  recently 
among  the  catalogues  of  the  Palace  and  the  Salon  of  1637. 
In  this  description  written  in  1637,  the  Labors  of  Hercu- 
les already  figures  among  the  other  canvases  that  adorned 
the  royal  residence. 

“Well  might  these  pictures  win  their  author  the  title 
of  Painter  to  the  King  in  1636  or  1637.  Still  more,  if  he 
had  not  already  been  so,  he  would  have  deserved  it  by  the 
decorations  he  made  for  the  ship  of  the  Holy  King 
Ferdinand,  says  D.  Narciso  Sentenach  in  the  following 
paragraph  of  Vol.  17,  pages  19  to  198,  in  the  same  Bulle- 
tin of  the  Spanish  Society  of  Research^ 

“The  most  curious  work  to  which  he  applied  his  pencils 
in  1638,  was  the  decoration  of  a famous  gift  the  Sevillians 
wished  to  present  to  their  monarch,  and  which  obtained 
the  highest  approval  of  the  Court,  thanks  to  the  beauty  of 
its  execution  due  to  Zurbaran’s  skill  dedicated,  on  this 
occasion,  to  profane  subjects. 


29 


“The  Lieutenant  of  the  royal  Alcazars  of  Seville  and 
Treasurer  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  Dr.  Antonio  Manrique, 
thought  it  would  be  a great  thing  to  compliment  the  king 
and  please  the  favorite,  Count  Duke  of  Olivares,  to  send 
them  a ship  in  which  all  the  splendor  of  the  naval  con- 
struction of  the  time  would  be  displayed,  in  order  that 
the  king  of  Spain  could  roam  in  it  upon  the  vast  lake  of 
the  Buen  Retiro,  recently  constructed,  and  imagine  he 
was  plowing  all  the  seas  that  surrounded  his  extensive 
kingdom. 

“The  ship  was  built  with  great  richness  in  the  work- 
shops of  the  Alcazar  of  Seville,  and  concerning  its  execu- 
tion and  cost,  Sr.  D.  Jose  Gestoso  has  made  a circumstan- 
tial report  in  a curious  pamphlet  entitled:  The  Ship  of 
the  Holy  King  Ferdinand^  published  in  1890. 

“The  figure  of  the  conqueror  of  Seville,  which  is  sculp- 
tured, shines  on  the  prow  of  the  barque  and  gives  its  name 
to  the  pilgrim  ship. 

“Finished  under  the  direction  of  Captain  Lucas  Guil- 
len de  Veas,  adorned  and  embellished  by  the  best  Sevil- 
lians among  whom  Zurbaran  was  first,  the  ship  was 
launched  in  the  waters  of  the  Guadalquivir,  on  one  of  the 
first  days  of  June,  1638,  and  afterwards  transported  to 
Madrid  where  the  Count  Duke  delivered  it  to  the  king 
in  the  early  part  of  the  following  July. 

“Captain  Lucas  Guillen  wrote  several  letters  stating 
the  wondrous  effect  the  ship  produced  at  the  Madrid 
Court,  and  how  it  shone  on  the  Retiro  lake  with  all  its 
rigging,  such  as  sails,  cordage,  pennants,  cannon,  stand- 
ards and  lanterns.  It  was  also  admired  for  the  taste  and 
perfection  of  its  details,  chiefly  its  pictures,  due  to  the 
skill  of  Alonso  de  Deza  and  Francisco  de  Zurbaran;  the 


30 


,ii;srs  Ri-.wARDiNC  rill-,  1I()|,^  /a-.w.  oi-  i athi;k  salmi-run 

Monastery  of  ( luadalupe. 


ST.  .11. KOMI-:  IX  (ILOKV 
Moiiastery  of  Guarlakipc. 


i-  . 


\ 


I 


latter  had  received  for  the  work  he  had  accomplished  by 
his  own  hand  in  the  famous  ship,  the  sum  of  914  reales. 

“The  paintings  must  have  been  allegorical  and  very 
well  executed,  when  they  so  much  attracted  the  attention 
of  the  monarch,  that  he  gave  to  the  artist  the  title  of 
Fainter  to  the  King. 

“The  great  Velazquez  may  have  helped  to  this  de- 
cision, for  he  showed  on  all  occasions  his  desire  to  protect 
the  painters  of  his  country,  and  gave  proofs  of  it  to  those 
who  sought  his  aid  and  were  grateful  for  his  amiability 
and  protection.” 

“Zurbaran  could  not  go  to  Court  with  the  ship,  as  he  no 
doubt  would  have  desired,  being  hindered  perhaps  by  the 
delicate  health  of  his  first  wife  Dona  Beatrice  de  Morales 
who  died  in  the  year  1639,  but  he  derived  much  satisfac- 
tion from  the  title  obtained  fro7n  the  king  since  he  took 
the  opportunity  to  sign  it  upon  the  first  picture  he  finished 
after  the  event.  From  that  time  his  name  remained 
credited  at  Court  and  Sevillian  art  was  recognized  as 
excellent  in  all  its  details. 

“A  good  proof  of  this  is  that  a few  months  later  and 
upon  the  advice  of  Velasquez,  the  Marquis  de  las  Torres, 
superintendent  of  the  royal  Palaces,  wrote  to  Zurbaran 
requesting  him  to  send  from  Seville  twelve  gilders  who 
were  to  do  all  the  work  relative  to  their  profession  to 
adorn  the  principal  salon  of  the  Alcazar,  which  was  then 
being  decorated  under  the  supervision  of  Velasquez.” 

At  the  same  time  as  the  Adoration  of  the  Shepherds 
and  the  decorations  of  the  ship  of  the  Holy  King  Ferdi- 
nand, Zurbaran  painted  in  1638  the  Saviour  Blessing  the 
World  which  the  widow  Sra.  Iturbe  possesses,  and  the 
Mass  of  Father  Cabanuelas  for  the  monastery  of  Guada- 


31 


lupe;  and  in  1639  he  finished  the  no  less  notable  canvases 
for  this  place  representing  Father  Salmeron^  Father 
Y dries  de  Figueroa  and  Father  lllesca. 

From  the  year  1639  to  the  year  1659  he  must  have 
signed  very  few  paintings  because  none  has  yet  been  dis- 
covered dated  in  that  period. 

Of  the  year  1659  are  the  Holy  Family  in  the  Museum 
of  Buda-Pest,  St.  Francis  of  Assisi  owned  by  D.  Aureliano 
de  Beruete,  and  the  Virgin  with  the  Sleeping  Infant  in 
Her  Arms,  the  property  of  the  Marquis  Unza  del  Valle; 
of  1661  is  an  Immaculate  Conception  which  is  in  the  same 
Museum  of  Buda-Pest  and  a Christ  Putting  on  His  Ves- 
ture after  the  Flagellation  which  is  venerated  in  the 
church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  of  Jadraque. 

In  regard  to  the  first  visit  of  Zurbaran  to  the  Court,  his 
biographers  do  not  agree  as  to  the  motives  and  causes  of 
his  summons.  Many  believe  that  he  did  not  appear 
there  until  i6yo  and  that  then  he  painted  the  Labors  of 
Hercules,  while  this  canvas,  as  Sr.  Tormo  has  shown,  is 
anterior  to  1637.  But  as  there  are  some  who,  when  speak- 
ing of  this  journey,  will  deny  the  friendship  which  existed 
between  him  and  the  author  of  the  Maids  of  Honor,  it 
might  not  be  superfluous  to  explain  this  point. 

“In  1690,”  says  Mr.  Paul  Lefort,  “and  by  the  instiga- 
tion of  Velasquez,  he  was  called  by  Philip  IV  to  Madrid, 
to  adorn  with  ten  paintings  one  of  the  great  salons  of  the 
palace  of  Buen  Retiro.” 

Don  Jose  Palomo  Anaya,  in  El  Pais  No,  6,466,^'^  denies 
the  supposed  intervention  of  Velasquez  in  the  following 
terms : “The  celebrated  painter  was  not  a great  friend 

of  him  who  not  being  a courtier  showed  and  kept  the 
title  of  Painter  to  the  King.  . . . And  being  rivals,  how 


32 


V 


i 


can  it  be  possible  that  Velasquez  sent  for  Zurbaran  in 
1650  to  come  by  order  of  the  king  to  paint  the  Labors  of 
Hercules  which  adorns  the  palace  of  Buen  Retiro?  It  is 
rumor  and  nothing  more,  because  until  1651  Velasquez 
did  not  return  from  his  second  voyage  to  Italy.”  Indeed, 
he  left  for  Italy  via  Malaga  in  January,  1649,  and  re- 
turned via  Barcelona  in  1651. 

However,  this  would  not  have  been  an  obstacle,  if  be- 
fore he  left  he  had  advised  the  king  to  give  this  order,  but 
the  picture  was  already  painted  before  1637.  As  far  as 
this  relates  to  the  enmity  or  rivalry  between  Velasquez 
and  Zurbaran,  there  are  proofs  to  the  contrary;  such,  for 
instance,  as  the  declaration  Zurbaran  made,  when  in 
Madrid  in  1658  on  the  occasion  of  an  investigation 
ordered  by  Philip  IV  with  the  view  of  conferring  upon 
Velasquez  the  Order  of  Santiago. 

The  document  reads  as  follows:  “In  this  town,  this 
day,  month  and  year  (Madrid,  23  December,  1658)  was 
received  the  testimony  of  Francisco  de  Curbaran  Salazar, 
native  of  Fuente  de  Cantos — in  the  province  of  Leon,  in 
Extremadura — resident  of  the  city  of  Seville,  whence 
he  cam.e  six  months  ago  to  live  here ; he  it  is  who  swore  in 
the  right  form  and  promised  to  tell  the  truth  in  all  he 
knows  and  what  he  is  asked.  Having  been  cognizant  of 
the  present  case,  said  that  he  knows  Diego  Silva  Velas- 
quez, candidate  for  the  Order  of  Santiago  and  private 
assistant  to  His  Majesty  and  purveyor  of  the  royal  apart- 
ments; that  for  forty  years  he  has  known  his  parents  who 
are  natives  of  the  city  of  Seville,  as  he  always  understood 
and  heard  publicly  said  without  any  contradiction  what- 
ever; and  although  he  did  not  know  the  paternal  ances- 
tors of  the  candidate,  he  knows  that  they  were  called 


33 


Diego  Rodriguez  de  Silva  and  Dona  Maria  Rodriguez, 
that  they  were  of  Portuguese  nationality,  of  the  city  of 
Oporto  in  the  kingdom  of  Portugal;  as  to  the  maternal 
ancestors  he  has  no  knowledge,  save  that  they  were  people 
of  distinction:  that  all  the  above  mentioned  are  from 
legitimate  marriages,  without  bastardy  or  unnatural  chil- 
dren, and  that  of  those  he  does  not  know,  he  has  not  heard 
anything  unfavorable.  That  also  those  referred  to  were 
pure  Christians  of  old  date,  without  any  taint  of  Jewish 
or  Moorish  race,  nor  a convert  in  any  form  however  near 
or  remote  they  may  be,  neither  did  any  of  their  ancestors 
do  penance  in  prison  nor  were  accused  before  the  Inquisi- 
tion, nor  any  other  tribunal  for  any  defect  or  crime  com- 
mitted against  our  Holy  Faith.  He  knew  that  in  the 
family  of  the  candidate  there  had  been  members  of  the 
Inquisition  of  Seville,  with  the  name  of  Silva  as  well  as 
Velasquez,  but  he  does  not  remember  their  Christian 
names  nor  the  degree  of  their  relationship  to  the  candi- 
date and  also  he  holds  that  said  parents  and  grandpar- 
ents are  of  noble  families  according  to  the  custom  and 
laws  of  Spain,  because  of  the  distinction  and  fame  which 
the  candidate  holds  and  so  his  parents  and  grandparents 
are  well  known  and  that  the  said  Rodriguez  came  from 
the  city  of  Oporto  to  the  city  of  Seville,  and  that  they 
were  of  the  Silva  family  of  said  city  of  Oporto,  which  is 
between  the  Duro  and  the  Mino,  and  of  the  most  illus- 
trious and  noble  race  of  that  kingdom,  and  in  this  opinion 
are  they  held  and  reputed  in  the  city  of  Seville  without 
any  contradiction  whatever,  as  it  is  public  and  notorious 
there;  that  they  never  held  menial  office  nor  mechanic, 
neither  any  of  those  meant  in  the  sixth  question  because 


34 


lu  I'  .vw  i.XTi 'KA  rRi;si  I )i \( ; a ciiAr  riA-;  ( )i-  iiii,  i,i:ssi  k i kiaks 

l-()U\rc,  I'ari.s. 


as  before  declared  of  the  parents  whom  he  knew,  he  saw 
them  always  treated  with  much  honor  and  consideration, 
and  as  to  the  grandparents  he  knows  that  they  were 
treated  and  esteemed  in  the  same  way  and  inasmuch  as 
the  said  candidate  never  held  any  office,  neither  in  the 
city  of  Seville  nor  at  Court,  except  that  of  painter  to  His 
Majesty  and  that  he  has  hitherto  been  occupied  in  the 
ornamentation  of  the  royal  Palace,  that  he  never  was 
known  to  own  a shop  or  a show  place  like  other  painters, 
that  he  always  kept  the  same  reputation  he  has  to  this 
day,  as  is  well  known  and  public  in  this  Court  as  in  the 
said  city  of  Seville,  and  if  there  were  anything  to  contra- 
dict that  which  is  said  herewith,  the  witness  would  have 
had  knowledge  of  it  as  he  knows  the  candidate  and  his 
parents  for  many  years — which  is  the  truth  that  proceeds 
from  the  oath  which  was  taken — it  was  declared,  read, 
signed  and  ratified,  and  having  said  this  in  conformity 
with  the  law  and  being  sixty  years  of  age,  more  or  less. 

Francisco  de  Curbaran  Salazar. 

It  is  not  probable  that  such  a declaration  would  be 
signed  by  an  enemy.  It  is  possible  that  from  this  date  the 
Extremadurian  changed  his  residence  to  the  Court  or  that 
he  alternated  it  between  Madrid  and  Seville,  so  that  it 
might  not  have  been  near  the  Guadalquivir,  but  on  the 
banks  of  the  Manzanares  that  he  painted  the  Holy 
Family  of  the  Museum  of  Buda-Pest,  the  5t.  Francis^  of 
Assisi  owned  by  Sr.  Beruete,  the  Virgin  with  the  Child  of 
the  Marquis  Unza  del  Valle  (1659)  as  well  as  the  Con- 
ception of  the  aforesaid  Buda-Pest  Museum,  and  the 
Christ  of  Jadraque  (1661).  Four  years  after  he  had 


signed  the  document  concerning  Velasquez,  D.  Lazaro 
Diaz  del  Valle  y de  la  Puerta  (native  of  Leon,  Spain,  as- 
sistant at  the  Court  of  His  Catholic  Majesty  King  Philip 
IV)  wrote  in  his  work,  still  in  manuscript,  on  the  “Mem- 
ories of  some  Men  distinguished  in  the  Art  of  Draw- 
ing” the  following  lines  about  Zurbaran : 

“Francisco  de  Zurbaran  or  Sornaran,  resident  of  this 
city  of  Seville,  gained  fame  in  our  times  by  the  many 
works  he  executed,  in  particular  by  those  done  by  his 
hand  in  the  second  cloister  of  the  Mercy,  of  that  city, 
illustrating  the  history  of  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  which  is  a 
famous  work.  He  lived  in  this  city  of  Madrid,  1662, 
and  in  this  same  city  he  acted,  together  with  Francisco 
Rici,  on  the  28th  of  February,  1664,  as  expert  in  the  valu- 
ation of  some  paintings  which  had  been  the  property  of 
Francisco  Jacinto  Salcedo.” 

The  usual  home  of  the  author  of  the  Apotheosis  of  St. 
Thomas  Aquinas  was  undoubtedly  Seville  where  he  left, 
among  other  pupils,  Martinez  de  Granadilla  who  gave 
him  much  aid  in  the  work  of  the  decoration  for  the  con- 
vent of  the  Mercy;  Bernabe  de  Ayala,  painter  of  merit, 
who  is  noted  for  the  beauty  and  solidity  of  his  style,  and 
the  brothers  Polanco  who  reproduced  with  an  admirable 
fidelity  many  works  of  the  master. 

From  the  information  given  it  is  inferred  that  the 
greater  part  of  Zurbaran’s  life  was  spent  in  Seville  and 
neighboring  towns  where  he  executed  all  the  works 
signed  and  unsigned  which  adorn  the  churches  and  con- 
vents in  Andalusia  and  Extremadura.  We  have  no 
proofs  that  he  ever  left  Spain  and  his  most  distant  voy- 
ages were  to  Madrid. 

He  was  very  fond  of  family  life  and  was  twice  mar- 

36 


FUXKKAL  (*F  A SAINT 
Louvre,  Paris. 


I 


"k 


ried;  first  to  Dona  Betariz  de  Morales  who  died  in  1639, 
according  to  the  death  notice  found  by  D.  Jose  Gestoso,^^ 
and  the  second  time  to  Dona  Leonor  de  Jordera,  by  whom 
he  had  several  children  and  among  them  a daughter  to 
whom  the  chapter  of  the  Cathedral  gave  a house  for  life  in 
the  Abades  street  (according  to  the  stipulated  agreement 
14  December,  1637,  which  still  exists  in  the  church 
archives).  If  this  daughter  did  not  become  a nun,  her 
father  had  another  one  who  seemed  to  have  been  one, 
judging  by  the  following  certificate  which  accompanied 
the  transfer  of  a painting:  “I  being  prioress  of  the  Con- 

vent of  the  Mother  of  God  in  Carmona,  testify  that  the 
picture  which  in  the  name  of  my  community  I have 
transferred  to  D.  Antonio  Domene,  is  by  Francisco  Zur- 
baran,  painted  by  himself  and  given  to  his  daughter  the 
Mother  Zurbarana  who  lived  in  this  convent,  and  in 
faith  of  which  I sign,  in  Carmona,  the  lOth  of  January 
of  1836.  Sister  Isabel  Maria  Arando,  Prioress  = Trans- 
ferred to  Baron  Taylor,  Seville,  3 May,  1836. — Antonio 
Domene,” 

To  one  of  the  two  or  possibly  a third  daughter,  the 
following  paper  refers  which  I copy  verbatim: 

“On  Wednesday,  24  May,  1643,  I,  Doctor  Juan  Mar- 
tin de  Amaya,  priest  of  the  Chapel  of  our  Holy  Church 
in  Seville,  baptized  Michaela  Francisco  daughter  of 
Francisco  de  Zurbaran  and  Dona  Leonor  de  Jordera  his 
wife,  her  godfather  being  captain  Pedro  Bicente  de  Es- 
pana,  resident  in  the  Magdalena  quarter.  Dr.  Juan  Mar- 
tin de  Amaya. witness.” 

The  life  of  the  Extremadurian  painter  was  because  of 
his  great  industry,  simple  and  monotonous.  There  was 
nothing  adventurous  in  its  whole  career.  In  contrast  to 


37 


this,  his  works  made  him  preeminent  among  the  most 
brilliant  of  his  contemporaries. 

• •••••••• 

If  after  carefully  considering  the  opinions  of  the 
critics,  the  reader  will  directly  observe  the  pictures  of 
Zurbaran,  he  will  realize  that  this  artist  who  began  his 
apprenticeship  as  an  ordinary  painter  of  images  devoted 
himself  almost  exclusively  to  portraits  and  religious  sub- 
jects. All  his  figures  are  copied  directly  from  nature, 
i.e.  from  the  living  model,  the  draperies  being  upon  the 
actual  figure,  or  the  manikin — the  use  of  which  he  some- 
times abused.  Graceful  and  perfect  is  his  manner  of 
painting  the  dress,  especially  white  woollen  cloths  which 
he  touches  with  tones  of  particular  softness.  His  com- 
positions are  generally  simple  and  of  few  figures,  all  of 
them  in  serious  and  dignified  attitudes,  made  mostly 
from  single  studies,  and  the  details  are  treated  with  exag- 
gerated care.  He  took  pleasure  in  finishing  the  figures 
of  the  foreground  with  great  contrasts  of  light  and  shade, 
of  an  admirable  effect,  which  was  diminished  gradually 
in  the  figures  occupying  the  background. 

For  this  propensity  for  great  play  of  light  and  shade,  he 
has  been  called  up  to  our  times  the  Spanish  Caravaggio^ 
but  as  I have  stated,  Zurbaran  never  imitated  the  famous 
Italian  and  between  the  works  of  the  one  and  the  other, 
there  may  be  noted  the  difference  that  exists  between 
moderation  and  excess. 

Zurbaran  shows  himself  to  us  in  his  productions  both  as 
a correct  draughtsman  and  as  a powerful  colorist,  but  not 
as  a simple  proselyte  of  the  naturalism  of  his  epoch,  since, 
as  M.  Blanc  says:  “No  painter,  not  even  Murillo  him- 

self, better  reflected  the  two  most  pronounced  tendencies 


38 


YIRfJIX  Wn'H  TWO  SAIXTS 
National  Gallery,  Edinhurgh,  Scotland. 


of  the  Spanish  character — a passion  for  realism  and  an 
aspiration  for  the  catholic  ideal,”  and  as  Lefort  says, 
“with  a deeply  penetrating  religious  sentiment  more 
virile  than  Murillo,  expressive  in  a different  manner  from 
Velasquez,  his  naturalism  as  robust  as  Ribera’s  is  perhaps 
even  more  true,  more  frank  and  more  spontaneous. 


39 


THE  PAINTINGS  OF  ZURBARAN 

The  numerous  and  admirable  works  of  the  Beti- 
can  Extremadurian  are  found  widely  dis- 
persed in  different  museums,  churches  and  gal- 
leries both  at  home  and  in  various  countries;  but  in  l8oo, 
when  the  Historical  Dictionary  was  published  by  Agus- 
tin  Cean  Bermudez,  the  best  were  preserved  in  the  fol- 
lowing places : 

IN  SEVILLE 

In  the  Cathedral — The  paintings  of  the  teredos  of  St. 
Peter.^^  The  centre  canvas  represents,  in  the  first  group, 
the  Holy  Apostle,  pontifically  dressed,  and  at  the  sides, 
the  vision  of  the  unclean  animals,  and  the  Saint  weeping 
for  his  sin.  The  second  group  is  the  apparition  of  the 
angel  in  the  prison,  and  that  of  Christ  when  St.  Peter  fled 
from  Rome;  and  in  the  middle  a Conception  of  Our 
Lady.  These  figures  are  larger  than  life-size.  At  the 
back  of  the  stall,  the  confession  of  St.  Peter  before  the 
other  apostles,  his  vacillation  in  the  faith  in  the  sea,  and 
the  miracle  of  the  crippled  man  in  the  porch  of  the  tem- 
ple, with  small  and  graceful  figures.  There  was  in  the 
dome  a very  fine  Eternal  Father,  which  has  been  re- 
moved, and  one  much  inferior  has  been  put  in  its  place. 
Finally,  he  painted  the  St.  John  the  Baptist  in  the  Desert, 
which  is  over  the  door  of  the  baptistry. 

In  the  parish  of  St.  Stephen. — ^St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul 


40 


CIIIIJ)  \1KC.I\  AT  I'R  \\  I'.R 
I’roinity  of  1).  Aureliaiio  fir  iiriuctr,  ALidiid. 


on  the  teredos.  The  other  paintings  are  by  his  pupils 
the  Polancos. 

In  the  parish  of  St.  Roman. — The  titular  Saint  which 
is  on  the  side  of  the  presbytery. 

In  the  college  of  St.  Thomas. — The  great  picture  above 
the  high  altar  (already  explained)  and  on  the  pedestal, 
six  saints  of  medium  size  of  the  order  of  St.  Dominic. 
The  portrait  of  the  Archbishop  Deza  in  the  library. 

In  the  convent  of  St.  Bonaventure. — The  pictures  that 
are  in  the  body  of  the  church,  on  the  epistle  side ; those  on 
the  gospel  side  are  by  Herrera  the  elder,  and  all  represent 
passages  in  the  life  of  the  titular  Saint. 

In  the  college  of  St.  Albert  of  the  Carmelite  Order. — 
The  paintings  on  the  first  teredos  that  is  on  the  right 
hand,  entering  by  the  door  of  the  church,  which  he 
painted  in  competition  with  Alonso  Cano  and  Francisco 
de  Pacheco  who  made  those  of  the  two  other  altar  pieces. 

In  the  convent  of  the  Mercy. — Two  holy  monks  of 
middle  size  on  the  pillars  of  the  chancel;  six  paintings 
of  the  twelve  that  are  in  the  small  cloister  relative  to  the 
life  of  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  one  of  which  is  signed  1629; 
St.  Serapio  in  the  chapel  of  the  dead ; the  portraits  of  the 
Bishop  of  Teruel,  Father  Jerome  Carmelo  and  the  mar- 
tyr Brother  Fernando  de  Santiago,  in  the  room  of  the 
engravings;  eleven  monks  standing,  in  natural  size,  and 
a Crucifixion,  and  the  portrait  of  Brother  Silvester  de 
Saavedra  in  the  library. 

In  the  convent  of  the  barefooted  monks  of  the  Mercy. 
— All  the  pictures  on  the  high  altar  and  those  on  the  lat- 
eral altars;  the  latter  are  small  figures  representing  inci- 
dents in  the  lives  of  St.  Peter  Nolasco  and  St.  Roman; 
those  which  are  on  the  altar  of  St.  Catherine  and  two  pic- 


41 


tures  in  the  same  chapel  representing  the  martyrdom  and 
burial  of  the  Saint  on  Mount  Sinai;  the  two  famous 
paintings  of  St.  Lawrence  and  St.  Anthony  Abbott  on 
their  altars;  two  others  above  the  holy  water  font  which 
represent  St.  Peter  Nolasco  and  another  holy  monk;  a 
Crucifixion  in  natural  size  in  the  sacristy,  and  a very 
small  figure  of  Our  Lady  of  Mercy.  Many  small  pic- 
tures of  religious  martyrs  in  the  lower  cloister,  painted 
with  highest  grace  and  ease. 

In  the  church  of  St.  Dominic  Portaceli. — ^^St.  Henry 
Suzon  in  the  collateral  reredos  on  the  gospel  side  and  St. 
Louis  Beltraan  in  the  front  one,  both  of  natural  size;  and 
on  the  entablature  various  incidents  of  their  lives. 

In  the  Trinity  church. — The  pictures  on  the  reredos  on 
the  epistle  side,  and  a lovely  baby  Jesus  in  the  porch  of 
the  sanctuary. 

In  the  Capuchin  church. — A Crucifixion  of  natural  size 
in  the  sacristy,  and  one  of  more  merit  on  the  stairway  of 
the  convent.  They  attribute  to  him  the  group  of  Apos- 
tles which  is  in  the  church,  but  it  is  more  likely  to  be  by 
Bernabe  de  Ayala,  his  pupil. 

In  St.  Peter. — The  celebrated  Crucifixion  of  the  ora- 
tory, and  some  say  that  the  portraits  of  the  various  holy 
Bishops  which  are  in  the  sacristy  are  due  to  his  hand. 

In  the  principal  college  of  Master  Rodrigo. — Another 
fine  Crucifixion  also  natural  size,  in  the  church,  and  the 
portrait  of  the  founder  in  the  rector’s  room. 

In  the  Carthusian  monastery  of  St.  Mary  of  the  Caves. 
— lliree  large  canvases  with  figures  more  than  life-size 
in  the  sacristy.  The  first  one  represents  St.  Bruno  sitting 
and  talking  with  Pope  Urban  II.  The  attitude  and  look 
of  the  Saint  impose  respect  for  their  modesty  and  sim- 


42 


ST.  FR.\N(TS  OF  .ASSIST 
l’rovinci:il  Muscami  of  Seville. 


■'  >--u' 


I 


/ 


1 


plicity.  The  second  picture  shows  St.  Hugo  in  the  re- 
fectory where  the  monks  are  eating  meat;  and  the  third 
is  Our  Lady  standing  with  various  Carthusians  beneath 
her  mantle.  In  the  prior’s  cell  is  a Holy  Family  and  in 
a room  next  to  the  high  oratory,  a child  Jesus  pressing  the 
blood  from  his  finger  which  he  pierced  while  making  a 
crown  of  thorns. 


IN  CORDOVA 

In  the  convent  of  St.  Paul. — Various  saints  in  full 
length  near  the  principal  stairway  and  in  other  places. 

In  the  Mercy. — Others  in  the  stairway,  almost  faded 
out. 

IN  JEREZ  OF  THE  FRONTERA 

In  the  Capuchin  church. — ^The  Franciscan  Jubilee  and 
various  holy  martyrs,  in  seven  pictures  divided  between 
the  church  and  the  choir. 

In  the  Carthusian. — The  Incarnation,  the  Birth,  the 
Circumcision,  and  the  Epiphany  of  Our  Lord;  the  four 
Evangelists  and  other  Saints  on  the  reredos  of  the  high 
altar.  Angels  with  incense  holders  on  the  side  doors, 
and  various  monks  in  the  corridor  which  leads  to  the 
sanctuary.  St.  Christopher  and  St.  Bruno  in  the  sac- 
risty; two  pictures  in  the  reredos  of  the  choir  and  two 
others  on  the  walls,  representing  the  Virgin  with  the 
Child,  and  some  monks  kneeling;  and  finally  Our  Lady 
helping  the  inhabitants  of  Jerez  in  a battle,  with  other 
pictures  in  the  refectory. 

IN  GUADALUPE  (eXTREMADURA) 

In  the  monastery  of  the  Jeronimites. — St.  Ildefonso 
and  St.  Nicholas  of  Bari  in  two  altars,  which  are  at  the 


43 


entrance  of  the  choir;  eight  large  canvases  which  portray 
the  life  of  St.  Jerome,  and  are  of  the  best  by  his  hand,  for 
the  good  effect  of  claro-obscuro,  in  the  sacristy;  and  two 
equally  good  in  another  room,  and  in  the  further  room  the 
holy  Doctor  in  glory. 


IN  MADRID 

In  the  New  palace. — A lovely  St.  Margaret,  which 
Bartolome  Velasquez  engraved  called  the  Shepherdess, 
as  she  is  in  this  costume  with  wallets  on  her  arm. 

In  the  palace  of  Buen  Retiro. — The  Saviour  with  a 
Cross  on  his  shoulders,  of  middle  size,  in  the  chapel  of 
St.  Theresa;  another  in  the  sacristy  signed  in  1661,  and 
they  attribute  to  him  the  canvas  which  is  in  the  end  of 
the  reredos  of  the  altar  of  St.  Bruno. 

IN  PENARANDA 

In  the  paroquial  church  of  the  town. — ^An  Incarna- 
tion in  the  sacristy. 

IN  CASTELLON 

In  the  convent  of  the  Capuchins. — Various  saints 
and  founders  of  religions  in  the  church  outside  the 
cloister. 

<4 

It  is  difficult  to  precisely  fix  the  present  location  of 
these,  and  the  other  numerous  paintings  which  the  Ex- 
tremadurian  executed,  and  however  much  is  investi- 
gated, some  will  always  remain  undiscovered  even  to  the 
most  fortunate  researcher. 

For  this  reason,  I do  not  expect  to  find  the  location  of 


44 


ST.  m'EX.WEXTI'R.V  MSTTEI)  \\\  ,\X  .\XGEE 
Museum  of  T)resden. 


I 


I 


all,  but  only  of  the  most  important  ones,  preserved  in 
foreign  countries  and  which  are  the  following: 

In  the  Kaiser-Friedrich  Museum  of  Berlin,  the  portrait 
of  a young  prince  who  is  supposed  to  be  the  son  of  Philip 
IV,  Don  Baltasar  Carlos.  The  prince  is  standing  and 
slightly  inclining  to  the  left,  with  looks  directed  to  the 
spectator.  He  has  heavy  locks  of  hair  and  wears  over 
the  cuirass  a red  sash,  brown  trousers  and  white  stockings 
with  black  shoes  complete  the  costume.  In  his  right  hand 
he  holds  a short  staff  of  command,  and  touches  with  his 
left  the  pommel  of  his  sword.  I owe  to  our  great  artist  D. 
Ignacio  Zuloaga  the  photograph  of  this  painting  which  he 
secured  from  Mr.  Alfred  Morrison  of  London.  The 
painting  is  on  a canvas  measuring  1.85  x 1.03. 

In  the  same  Museum  is  preserved  St.  Bonaventura  vis- 
ited by  St.  Thomas  to  whom  he  shows  the  Crucifix,  the 
origin  of  his  faith  (signed  in  1629) ; in  the  Dresden 
Museum,  there  is  St.  Bonaventura  visited  by  an  angel  who 
reveals  to  him  the  Cardinal  that  should  be  elected  Pope. 
In  that  of  Brunswick,  a portrait  of  himself  (formerly  at- 
tributed to  Ribera)  and  in  Breslau,  Jesus  Christ  after  the 
flagellation^  size  1.79  x 1.23.  In  the  Museum  of  Buda- 
pest, there  is  a Sacred  Family  (signed  1659)  and  a Con- 
ception (signed  1661).  In  the  Hermitage  of  St.  Peters- 
burg, a jS/.  Lawrence  (signed  1636)  ; and  in  the  National 
Gallery,  London,  an  Adoration  of  the  Shepherds  and  a 
Monk  at  Prayer.  In  Edinburgh,  a Virgm  in  Glory 
dressed  in  pale  lilac  and  obscure  blue,  and  surrounded  by 
clouds  and  heads  of  cherubim,  resting  her  feet  upon  these 
latter  and  a half  moon.  Underneath  on  the  ground  is  a 
woman  saint  on  the  right,  and  a man  saint  on  the  left,  and 
a golden  landscape  in  the  background;  it  measures  0.98  x 


45 


0.68.  In  the  Louvre,  SL  Bonavenfure  presiding  over  a 
chapter  of  the  lesser  Brothers — and  the  Funeral  of  the 
Faint.  In  Grenoble  (France),  the  Adoration  of  the 
Shepherds  and  the  Adoration  of  the  Kings.  In  Lyons,  a 
St.  Francis  of  Assisi  standing  with  face  lifted,  and  eyes 
fixed  on  the  sky,  measuring  1.97  x 1.06.  In  Italy,  there 
are  in  the  gallery  of  the  Bianco  palace  of  Genoa  three  can- 
vases: The  Viaticum  to  the  Sick.,  a magnificent  work 
measuring  2.90  x 3.07;  a St.  Ursula  of  1.66  x 1.03  and  a 
St.Fuphemiaoi  1.66  x 1.03. 

^ ^ ^ 

Among  private  collections  outside  of  Spain,  Count 
Charles  Dunin  possesses  in  his  home  in  Germany  a St. 
Theresa  of  Jesus,  and  the  Countess  of  Paris  holds  in  her 
chateau  of  Randan  (Auvergne)  part  of  the  collection 
which  belonged  to  the  Carthusians  of  Jerez,  other  can- 
vases of  which  are  admired  in  the  Museum  of  Cadiz. 
Among  those  belonging  to  the  Countess  are:  the  Anuncia- 
tion,  the  Circumcision,  the  Adoration  of  the  Kings,  and 
the  famous  Adoration  of  the  Shepherds  which  Zurbaran 
signed  1638  as  painter  to  the  King;  the  four  measure 
2.61  X i.iy.  Lord  Barrymore  has  in  his  magnificent  col- 
lection in  London  a St.  Elizabeth  of  Hungary  whose 
dress  shows  the  incontestable  proofs  of  Zurbaran’s  brush; 
and  in  St.  Petersburgh,  the  Grandduke  Constantine  has  a 
Christ  Crucified  which  he  acquired  as  a Velasquez. 

<4  V <4 

In  the  official  museums,  churches  and  public  edifices 
of  Spain,  there  still  remain  his  most  valuable  works. 

In  the  national  Museum  of  the  Prado  one  admires  the 
following  pictures : 


46 


The  Vision  of  St.  Peter  Nolasco.  Kneeling  asleep  be- 
fore a table  is  the  Saint,  founder  of  the  Order,  looking  at 
a young  angel  who  appears  to  him  in  his  sleep,  and  who 
with  the  right  hand  uplifted  shows  him  the  heavenly 
Jerusalem,  which  is  seen  in  an  opening  in  the  sky  sur- 
rounded by  luminous  clouds.  Figures  of  natural  size, 
measurements  1.79  x 2.23. 

The  Apparitio?i  of  St.  Peter  the  Apostle  to  St.  Peter 
Nolasco.  Kneeling,  with  open  arms,  the  Saint  of  the 
Mercy  sees  in  an  ecstasy  his  patron  St.  Peter  the  Apostle, 
among  resplendent  clouds  of  celestial  glory,  crucified  with 
the  head  downwards,  as  he  was  martyred.  Figures  of  nat- 
ural size,  measuring  1.79  x 2.23,  signed. 

St.  Francis  Dead.  The  Saint  is  on  the  ground,  his  head 
resting  upon  a tile,  the  hands  crossed  upon  the  breast. 
In  the  foreground  is  a jar  with  a hissop  brush,  and  at  the 
left  a skull  with  two  candelabra  with  lighted  candles. 
The  whole  figure  and  of  life-size,  measurements,  0.80  x 
1.90. 

St.  Casilda  standing,  represented  in  the  act  of  turning 
into  roses  the  bread  which  she  carries  in  her  skirt  to  succor 
the  captive  Christians.  When  surprised  by  her  father  the 
Moorish  king,  she  was  exercising  this  charity  for  which 
God  liberated  her  from  death.  Figure  full  length  and 
life-size,  O.80  x 1.90. 

The  Infant  Jesus  sleepmg  on  the  Cross  with  the  Crown 
of  Thorns  by  his  side,  0.75  x 1. 

Hercules  separating  the  two  Mountains.,  Calpe  and 
Abyla,  1.35  x 1.53. 

Hercules  vanquishing  the  Giants.,  1.36  x 1.67. 

Hercules  vanquishing  the  Lion  in  the  Numean 
Swamps.,  1.51  X 1.66. 


47 


Hercules  fighting  the  ^rymanthean  Boar,  1.32  x 1.53. 

Hercules  subduing  the  Cretan  Bull  which  Neptune  sent 
against  Minos,  1.32  x 1.52. 

Hercules  fighting  with  Anteas,  1.36  x 1.53. 

Hercules  fighting  Cerberus  and  taking  Alcestes  from 
the  infernal  regions,  1.32  x 1.51. 

Hercules  stopping  the  course  of  the  river  Alpheus, 
1.33x1.53. 

Hercules  killing  the  Hydra  in  the  Swamps  of  Lerna, 
1.33  X 1.67. 

Hercules  tormented  by  the  burning  Tunic  of  the  Cen- 
taur Nestor,  1.36  X 1.67. 

In  the  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  the  portraits  on  can- 
vas of:  The  Master  Brother  Pedro  Machado,  2.94  x 
1.22;  the  Master  Brother  Francisco  Zumel,  2.04  x 1.22; 
the  Master  Brother  Jeronimo  Perez,  2.04x1.22;  the 
Master  Brother  Hernando  de  Santiago,  2.04  x 1.22;  a 
Friar  of  the  Order,  2.04  x 1.22;  and  the  Blessed  Alonso 
Rodriguez,  2.66  x 1.67. 

In  the  Municipality  of  Barcelona  there  are : a Monk  in 
Ecstasy,  1.90  x 1.20;  and  a St.  Francis  of  Assisi,  1.67  x 
1 -05- 

In  the  Provincial  Museum  of  Seville  are  the  following 
works  which  I copy  from  the  catalogue  of  1897,  together 
with  the  descriptions  of  the  same,  although  some  have  al- 
ready been  described  in  former  paragraphs : 

SALON  OF  MURILLO 

121.  The  Virgin  of  the  Caves.  Standing — her  head 
encircled  with  an  imperial  crown,  dressed  in  a red  tunic — 
the  Virgin  shelters  under  her  blue  mantle,  which  two 
small  angels  hold  up,  a community  of  Carthusians  are 


48 


MASTER  I RE\K  1-RAX(TS('()  /AMI  E 
Royal  Academy  of  San  ^'c^lan(lo,  ^Eidriil. 


v' ' 


:9 

(Z 


kneeling  before  her  in  reverent  attitude.  Background  of 
luminous  clouds,  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  On  the  ground, 
many  flowers  are  scattered.  Figures  somewhat  larger 
than  life-size,  2.67  x 3.25 — canvas. 

122.  SL  Carmelo,  Bishop  of  T cruel.  In  the  habit  of 
the  Order  of  the  Mercy,  mitred,  standing,  his  left  arm 
holding  an  open  book  against  his  waist,  and  in  his  right, 
a pen.  His  gaze  is  directed  heavenward.  In  the  back- 
ground, the  Virgin,  appears  to  him.  Figure  life-size, 
1 .88  X 1 .08 — canvas. 

123.  Tht  Child  Jesus.  He  is  seated  and  has  wounded 
his  hand  while  weaving  a Crown  of  thorns;  in  the  lumi- 
nous background  are  seraphim  and  upon  a pedestal  a vase 
with  flowers.  Figure  of  conventional  size,  0.70  x 0.42, 
on  wood. 

124.  Jesus  dying  on  the  Cross.  Background  very 
obscure.  At  the  foot  of  the  Cross,  a view  of  the 
city  of  Jerusalem.  Figure  of  life-size,  2.32x1.67 — 
canvas. 

125.  Jesus  crowning  St.  Joseph.  Our  Lord,  standing, 
sustaining  the  Cross  on  his  left  arm,  extends  the  right 
hand  with  a crown  of  thorns  in  the  attitude  of  placing  it 
upon  the  head  of  St.  Joseph,  who  kneels  before  him. 
Background  resplendent  in  which  may  be  seen  the 
Eternal  Father,  the  Holy  Spirit  and  various  seraphim. 
Figures  life-size,  2.^0  x 1.66 — canvas. 

126.  The  Blessed  Domif^ic  Henry  Suzon.  Standing, 
bareheaded,  with  eyes  lifted  toward  the  sky,  his  right 
hand  holding  the  folds  of  his  robe  and  exposing  part  of 
his  breast  upon  which  he  engraves  with  a bistoury  in  let- 
ters of  blood,  on  his  skin,  the  initials  I.  H.  S.  A figure 
of  admirable  mysticism.  In  the  background  a landscape 


49 


with  a group  of  small  figures  of  Dominicans,  houses  and  a 
young  angel.  Figure  life-size,  2.09  x 1.54 — canvas. 

127.  The  Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  and 
Foundation  of  the  Greater  College  of  St.  Thomas  of 
Seville.  Figures  larger  than  life-size,  4.80  x 4.00 — 

qq 

canvas. 

128.  St.  Louis  Tehran.  Standing,  holding  a cup  or 
vase  of  embossed  silver  out  of  which  there  arises  a small 
fantastic  animal,  which  marvellously  tells  him  that  the 
liquid  contained  in  the  vase  is  poison.  Background  of 
landscape  in  which  two  miracles  of  the  Saint  are  repre- 
sented with  very  small  figures.  Figure  of  natural  size, 
2.09  X 1 .45 — canvas. 

129.  A Crucifixion.  In  the  act  of  dying.  Background 
very  obscure.  Figure  of  life-size,  2.55x1.72 — canvas 
(Zurbaran^?) 

130.  St.  Dominic.  Standing  and  directing  his  gaze  to 
the  sky,  with  his  clasped  hands  grasps  a branch  of  lilies. 
Figure  of  half  the  natural  size,  2.00  x 1.25 — canvas. 

131.  St.  Jerome.  He  is  standing  in  cardinal’s  dress 
and  holds  an  open  book  against  his  body.  Background 
plain  and  very  dark.  Figure  of  natural  size,  2.00  x 1.25 
— canvas. 

132.  St.  Gregory.  Standing,  pontifically  dressed, 
and  reading  a volume  which  he  holds  in  his  hands.  Back- 
ground plain  and  very  dark.  Figure  life-size,  2.00  x 1 .25 
— canvas. 

133.  The  Saviour  nailed  to  the  Cross  and  Dead. 
Background  obscure,  figure  of  natural  size,  1.95  x 0.88 — 
canvas. 

134.  A Holy  Bishop.  Standing,  pontifically  dressed 
with  a book  under  his  left  arm,  and  in  the  right  hand  a 


ST.  r.\RMI-,L,  lilSIK  )1>  ( )|-  Ti:Kri,I, 
Provincial  iMu.scum  of  Seville, 


/ 


I 


■ ? 


staff.  Background  obscure,  figure  of  natural  size,  i .95  x 
0.88 — canvas. 

135.  The  Conference  of  St.  Bruno  with  Pope  Urban  II. 
He  is  shown  on  the  left,^^  seated  in  a chair  under  a can- 
opy; the  Saint  on  a bench.  The  background  is  architec- 
tural, and  adorned  in  the  Renaissance  style,  with  two 
windows  and  a door,  in  which  we  see  the  figure  of  a young 
attendant,  and  another  person  whose  head  appears  in  the 
second  foreground.  Figures  more  than  life-size,  2.72  x 
3.07 — canvas. 

136.  A Holy  Bishop  Martyr  of  the  Order  of  the  Mercy. 
He  is  standing  in  the  attitude  of  writing,  with  a knife 
sticking  in  his  neck,  while  an  angel  places  on  his  head  the 
crown  of  martyrdom.  On  the  left,  upon  a table  covered 
with  a green  cloth,  is  a mitre  and  an  inkstand.  Figure 
of  natural  size,  .1.94  x 1.08 — canvas. 

137.  The  Eternal  Father.  Seated  on  a throne  of 
clouds,  surrounded  with  a choir  of  seraphim  with  a 
sceptre  in  the  left  hand,  the  right  extended  over  the 
world.  Figure  of  colossal  size,  2.60  x 2.67 — canvas. 

138.  St.  Francis  of  Assisi.  He  is  standing,  contemp- 
lating a crucifix  which  he  holds  in  his  right  hand.  Back- 
ground of  landscape.  Figure  of  natural  size,  1.95  x 0.93 
— canvas. 

139.  St.  Hugo  with  various  Carthusian  Monks  in  the 
Refectory  or  The  Miracle  of  the  Holy  Vow.  Figures  of 
natural  size,  2,62  x 3.18 — canvas. 

CONFERENCE  HALL  OF  THE  ACADEMY 

13.  St.  Francis  de  Borja.  Standing,  dressed  in  the 
habit  of  the  Order,  holding  up  the  Holy  Eucharist,  at  his 
feet  the  emblems  of  his  dignity,  his  crest,  some  books  and 


51 


a skull,  with  an  imperial  crown.  Background  of  land- 
scape. In  the  upper  left  hand  corner  is  seen  the  mono- 
gram of  the  Company,  resplendent  with  light.  Figure  of 
natural  size,  2.07  x 1.40 — canvas. 

14.  SL  Ignatius  Loyola.  Standing  before  a table, 
upon  which  is  an  open  book,  the  Saint  interrupts  his  lec- 
ture at  the  contact  of  Christ’s  love,  represented  by  a flam- 
ing circle  in  which  the  initials  I.  H.  S.  are  seen,  and  which 
comes  from  heaven  down  to  the  Saint.  In  the  back- 
ground a view  of  a court  is  visible.  Figure  of  natural 
size,  2.07  X 1.40 — canvas  (Zurbaran^) 

15.  St.  Francis  de  Borja.  Standing,  dressed  in  the 
habit  of  the  Order, .he  looks  at  a skull  with  imperial 
crown,  emblem  of  his  conversion,  which  he  holds  in  his 
left  hand.  In  the  lower  left  hand  corner  are  three  cardi- 
nal’s hats,  and  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner  a flaming 
circle  with  the  monogram  I.  H.  S.  Background  plain. 
Figure  of  natural  size,  1.87  x 1.21 — canvas  (Zurbaran*?) 

UPPER  HALL  OF  THE  XVII  CENTURY 

31.  The  Saviour  expiring  on  the  Cross.  Figure  of  con- 
ventional size,  1.36  X 0.73 — canvas  of  coarse  texture. 

32.  The  same  subject  as  the  preceding  one.  Figure  of 
conventional  size,  1.25  x O.80 — canvas. 

In  the  Cathedral — ^(In  the  titular  chapel  are  preserved 
the  famous  paintings  of  the  reredos  of  St.  Peter,  and  in 
the  sacristy  of  the  Older  chapel  the  St.  Francis  which 
Cean  Bermudez  saw  over  the  door  of  the  baptistry) . In 
1909,  D.  Jose  Gestoso,  D.  Gonzalo  Bilbao  and  some  of 
their  friends  discovered  the  following  paintings  by  Zur- 
baran  which  had  been  lost  : a Virgin  of  the  Mercies  with 
Saints  of  this  Order,  in  the  main  sacristy — two  pictures 


M \M  i.R  !-KlAk  !'!■,  ! l.k  M.\(  llAlM  > 
Royal  Atadcniy  ol  S,m  iTiiumdo.  Ma<lrid. 


. V 


V 

A. 


1 


i 


■■lii 


of  the  life  of  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  in  the  sacristy  of  the 
Chalices;  and  a Virgin^  of  half  size  with  the  Infant  Jesus, 
and  a St.  Anthony  of  Padua  (doubtful)  in  the  chapel  of 
St.  Francis. 

In  the  Archepiscopal  Palace,  four  very  beautiful  Apos- 
tles. 

In  the  University,  a St.  Dominic. 

In  the  Hospital  of  the  Blood,  of  the  city  of  Seville, 
there  are  nine  pictures  by  Zurbaran  whose  subjects  are: 
the  Virgin  of  the  Rosary,  St.  Eulalie,  St.  Catherine,  St. 
Engracia,  St.  Barbara,  St.  Mathilde,  St.  Anna,  St.  Marina 
and  St.  Dorothy. 

In  the  Sacramental  Chapel  of  the  parish  of  St.  Magda- 
lena. Two  pictures  very  much  damaged,  of  the  Life  of 
St.  Peter  Nolasco. 

In  the  parish  of  St.  Stephen.  The  two  pictures  of  St. 
Peter  and  St.  Paul  of  the  high  altar,  which  Cean  Bermu- 
dez mentions  as  being  by  Zurbaran,  but  which  are  known 
now  to  be  by  the  brothers  Polanco. 

In  the  Town  Hall  of  Seville  a portrait  of  a Young 
Gentleman. 

In  the  episcopal  palace  of  Granada,  there  is  a St. 
Casilda  much  superior  to  that  of  the  Prado  Museum,  al- 
though in  the  same  style. 

In  the  principal  Museum  of  Cadiz  there  are  the  follow- 
ing canvases : 

The  Jubilee,  2.48  x 1.67;  St.  Bruno  at  prayer,  3.41  x 
1.95;  the  Pentecost,  1.60x1.18;  St.  John  Baptist  in 
the  Desert,  0.60x0.79;  St.  Luc,  0.65' x 0.63;  St.  Law- 
rence, 0.60  X 0.79;  St.  John  Evangelist,  0,65  x 0.63;  St. 
Marcus,  0.53x0.53;  St.  Mathew,  0.55x0.53;  and  the 
painting  on  wood  of  St.  Vgon,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  1.20  x 


53 


0.6234;  a Cardinal  of  the  Carthusian  Order ^ 1.20  x 
0.6234;  a Holy  Carthusian,  1.20x0.6234;  ^t.  Telmo, 
Bishop  of  the  Order,  1.20  x 0.6234;  St.  Ugon,  Bishop  of 
Grenoble,  1.2034  x 0.6234;  a Monk  Martyr  of  the  Order, 
1.2034  X 0.6234;  Cardinal  Nicholas,  1.2034  x 0.6234;  A 
Young  Angel  with  a censer,  1.2034  x 0.6234  and  another 
Young  Angel,  companion  of  the  preceding  one,  1.2034  x 

0.6234. 

D.  Enrique  Romero  de  Torres,  in  the  Bulletin  of  the 
Provincial  Commission  of  Historic  and  Artistic  Monu- 
ments of  Cadiz,  pages  97  to  108,  Vol.  I — 1908,  has  writ- 
ten an  interesting  article  about  these  pictures,  and  as  the 
notices  contained  in  it  refer  to  the  companions  of  these 
pictures,  I think  it  appropriate  to  reproduce  here  the  fol- 
lowing paragraphs : 

“This  magnificent  collection  which  the  Cadiz  citizens 
show  with  real  pride,  and  which  constitutes  the  most  se- 
lect of  the  Museum  was  once  much  more  numerous;  but 
owing  to  scandalous  events  and  fatal  circumstances,  it 
has  been  reduced  to  eighteen  canvases.  . . . 

Belonging  to  this  beautiful  collection  were  twelve 
more  paintings.  Six  of  them  which  were  particularly  fine 
represented  the  Virgin  of  the  Rosary  with  some  Monks, 
the  Circumcision,  the  Adoration  of  the  Kings,  the  Na- 
tivity, the  Annunciation  of  the  Angel  to  Mary  and  a 
Moorish  Battle,  all  of  which  were  sold  in  the  year  1837 
causing  great  scandal  which  reached  the  Cortes,  and  as 
this  act  was  entirely  against  the  rules  of  the  Artistic  Com- 
mission of  Cadiz,  of  the  Royal  Academy  of  Fine  Arts  of 
San  Fernando,  as  well  as  those  of  the  Academy  of  Cadiz, 
all  their  members  protested  against  such  censurable  sale. 


54 


PRIXCE  PAT/FASAR 
Kaiser  Frederirk  Aluseum,  lierlin. 


I 


7, 


and  the  deceitful  and  unexpected  manner  in  which  it  was 
effected. 

The  other  six  remaining  ones  disappeared  with  many 
original  works  of  Spanish  and  foreign  masters. 

The  great  artistic  value  of  these  lost  canvases  is  clearly 
indicated  by  the  sums  for  which  they  were  sold,  although 
at  a really  low  price,  as  proved  by  the  copy  of  the  bill  of 
sale  which  is  preserved  in  the  Archives  of  the  Royal  Acad- 
emy of  San  Fernando. 

The  sale  was  effected  in  the  name  of  D.  Jose  Cuesta, 
resident  of  Seville,  and  runs  as  follows:  “For  a picture 

which  represents  the  Virgin  of  the  Rosary  with  some 
Monks,  200,000  reales.  Another  representing  the  Cir- 
cumcision, at  80,000  reales.  For  another  which  repre- 
sents the  Adoration  of  the  Kings,  40,000  reales.  For  an- 
other one,  the  Nativity,  40,000,  and  for  another  one 
which  represents  a Moorish  Rattle,  40,000,  forming  a 
total  of  22,000  duros. 

Five  of  these  paintings  were  later  seen  in  the  gallery  of 
the  Duke  of  Montpensier,  in  the  palace  of  St.  Telmo 
Seville,®^  and  they  are  noted  in  the  catalogue  of  the  palace 
as  follows:  “Zurbaran:  num.  174.  The  Crcumcision, 

height  9 ft.  6 inches,  width  6 ft.  6 inches.  In  parenthesis 
the  following  line  says:  (This  picture  and  the  three  fol- 
lowing were  painted  for  the  Carthusian  Monastery  of 
Jerez.  One  of  them  is  signed).  199,  the  Adoration  of 
the  Shepherds,  height  9 ft.  6 inches,  width  6 ft.  6 inches. 
186.  The  Annunciation,  same  size.  No.  189.  The  Ad- 
oration of  the  Magi,  ditto.  No.  190,  the  Virgin  of  the 
Mercies  with  two  Saints  at  her  Feet,  height  6 ft.,  width  4 
ft.  6 inches.” 


55 


This  last  one,  judging  by  its  subject  and  size,  might  be 
the  same  as  the  Virgin  of  the  Rosary  with  some  Monks^ 
but  nothing  indicates  its  origin.  The  Moorish  Battle  is 
seemingly  lost. 

Sr.  Romero  de  Torres  has  also  discovered  in  the  prov- 
ince of  Cadiz,  in  Jerez  de  la  Frontera,  a Holy  Face,  in  the 
chapel  of  Pabon  of  the  St.  Michael  church,  and  in  Arcos 
de  la  Frontera,  an  Annunciation  measuring  1.50  x 1.00  in 
the  convent  of  the  Incarnation. 

If  the  paintings  of  Seville  and  Cadiz  are  remarkable, 
those  of  the  Jeronimite  Monastery  of  Guadalupe  (prov- 
ince of  Caceres)  are  not  inferior  to  them.  There  we  find 
the  ten  canvases  which  Zurbaran  painted  for  the  sacristy, 
two  of  them  representing  incidents  of  the  life  of  the  Saint, 
are  placed  at  either  side  of  the  chapel.  The  eight  re- 
maining ones  picture  the  extraordinary  and  miraculous 
deeds  of  the  venerable  members  of  the  Order.  The 
Saintly  Doctor  in  heavenly  glory  painted  for  the  centre 
of  the  chapel  and  now  kept  in  a room  adjoining  the  sac- 
risty, and  the  other  pictures  which  are  there,  are  attributed 
to  the  same  artist,  and  were  done  for  this  monastery. 

In  the  convent  of  the  nuns  of  the  Franciscan  Order,  in 
Corruna,  a St.  Bonaventure  in  ecstasy  is  preserved;  it  is 
a magnificent  painting  larger  than  life-size. 

In  the  Capuchin  convent  of  Castellon  can  still  be  seen 
the  portraits  of  St.  Augustin,  St.  Dominic,  St.  Francis  of 
Assisi,  St.  Basil,  St.  Benedict,  St.  Elias,  St.  Peter  Nolasco, 
St.  Bruno,  St.  Jerome  and  St.  Ignatius  of  Loyola,  all 
measuring  1.90  x i.io. 


■ DCY  PN  DRIIFRA  HP  PPSPFTn  V I FAl  TAR  kraa 

S'r,  CA'l  lli-.RIXK  ( )F  SIKXXA 
Owned  liy  Inf:inta  Drn'ia  IsaFiHa  of  lionrhon.  Afadrid. 


D.  Salvador  Viniegra  believes  that  they  are  copies,  of 
which  the  Academy  of  Fine  Arts  of  Malaga  possesses  two 
of  the  originals.  These  are  the  works  mentioned  in  the 
catalogue  of  the  collection  of  the  Academy  under  the 
titles  of  a faintly  Carthusian  Cardinal^  1.90  x 1.10,  and  a 
Monk,  1.90  X 1.12. 

In  the  cathedral  of  Palencia  there  is  a St.  Catherine 
identical  with  that  which  the  Infanta  Isabel  possesses. 

In  the  sacristy  of  the  church  of  Motrico  (Guipuzcoa)  a 
Crucifixion  of  large  dimensions  is  preserved. 

In  the  royal  church  of  St.  Francis  the  Grand  in  Madrid, 
there  are:  a St.  Jacobo  de  la  Marca,  of  2.90  x 1.67;  a St. 
Bonaventura,  of  2.90  x 1 .67 ; a St.  Brands,  of  2.90  x 1 .65 ; 
and  a St.  Anthony,  of  2,90  x 1.65;  attributed  by  some  to 
the  productive  Alonso  Cano. 

In  the  parish  of  St.  Barbara,  in  Madrid,  there  is  a St. 
Carmelo,  2.21  x 1.16;  and  in  the  parish  of  St.  John  the 
Baptist  of  Jadraque  (province  of  Guadalajara)  a Christ 
replacing  his  Clothes  after  the  Flagellation,  1.67  x 1.07. 

In  the  hands  of  private  persons  and  collectors  there  are 
the  following  pictures,  some  of  which  are  of  doubtful  au- 
thenticity : 


IN  MADRID 

St.  Catherine,  1.30  x 0.98,  belonging  to  the  Infanta  Isa- 
bel de  Bourbon. 

St.  Luke  before  Christ  Crucified,  1.05x0.85,  belong- 
ing to  Don  Alfonso  de  Bourbon. 

A Monk  of  the  Mercy,  0.69  x 0.56,  to  the  Marquis  de 
Argudi'n. 

A Christ  with  the  Cross  on  the  Shoulders,  and  the  Cyre- 
nean,  1.12  x 1.68,  to  the  heirs  of  General  Gamir. 


57 


The  Saviour  Blessing  the  Worlds  to  the  widow  of  Sr. 
Iturbe. 

Christ  Crucified,  1.68  x 1.19,  to  Don  Manuel  Longoria. 

The  Holy  Face,  1.01  x 0.78,  to  D.  Mariano  Pacheco. 

Veronicas  Handkerchief,  1.05x0.77,  to  D.  Angel 
Aviles. 

St.  Anthony,  2.04  x 1.10,  to  the  Marquis  de  Casa-Tor- 
res. 

Two  Young  Angels,  1.38  x 1.04  and  the  Head  of  a 
Saint,  0.82  X 0.80,  to  the  heirs  of  Dona  Isabel  Lopez. 

St.  Francis,  0.75  x 0.58,  belonging  to  the  heirs  of  D. 
Eduardo  Martinez  del  Campo.. 

An  Infant  Jesus  wounding  his  Finger  while  weaving  a 
Crown  of  Thorns,  0.87  x 1.10,  to  D.  Gustavo  Morales. 

Christ  on  the  Cross,  1.67  x 1.09,  to  don  A.  de  las  H. 

St.  Francis  of  Assisi,  1.27  x 0.97,  and  a Virgin  Child  at 
Prayer,  1.18  x 0.95,  to  D.  Aureliano  de  Beruete. 

St.  Agueda,  0.85  x 0.55,  to  the  widow  of  Sr.  Domin- 
guez. 

Flowers  and  fruit,  0.82  x 1.09,  to  the  Countess  de  Mon- 
tarco. 

The  Virgin  and  the  Infant  Jesus  sleeping  in  her  Arms, 
1.20x0.98,  to  D.  Jose  Velasco,  Marquis  de  Unza  del 
Valle. 

Another  Child  Jesus  wou?iding  hitnself  while  weaving 
a Crown  of  Thorns,  1.02  x 0.73,  to  the  Visecountess  del 
Castillo  de  Genoves. 

St.  Inez,  1.46  X 1.08,  to  the  Duke  de  Bejar. 

St.  Dommic  de  Guzman,  1.6^  x 1.08,  to  D.  Jose  Canal 
y Madrono. 

Another  St.  Dominic  de  Guzman,  0.55"  x 0.35,  to  Dona 
Sol  Rubio  de  Garcia  Bustos. 


f8 


'I'HK  iMMArri.A'n-:  rn>:c\.v'\'U)S 

( ()!lc(  tiim  ot  the  M,ii(iuis  ol  ( r.ilvo,  Miidiiil 


a 


Sf.  Diego,  1.88  x 1.00  and  Sf.  Barbara,  i.io  x 0.75,  to 
the  Marquis  de  Viana. 

John  the  Baptist,  1.4034x1.02,  to  D.  Rafael 
Tovar. 

A Conception,  2.00  x 1.46,  to  the  Marquis  de  Cerralvo. 

A Writer  of  the  Order  of  the  Mercy,  1.68  x 1.16,  to 
D.  Jose  Prado  y Palacio. 

A Group  of  Angels,  0.44  x 0.55,  to  the  Duke  de  Val- 
encia. 

A Virgin  with  the  Child  in  her  Arms,  1.32  x 0.97,  to  the 
Duke  de  Uceda. 

At.  Francis,  0.90  x 0.70,  to  D.  Segundo  Cuesta. 

A Little  Lamb,  0.90  x 0.70,  to  Mr.  Stanislaus  O. 
Rossen. 

Two  Heads,  0.35  x 0.48,  to  Louis  Sainz. 

St.  Francis,  0.90  x 0.70,  to  D.  Luis  Page. 

St.  Francis,  1.62  x 1.07,  to  D.  Luis  Navas. 

St.  Francis,  1.20  x 1.02,  to  D.  Enrique  Mansberger. 

Ecce  Homo,  0.78  x 0.57,  to  D.  Ecequiel  Arizmendi. 

Christ  on  the  Cross,  1.07  x 0.73,  to  D.  Luis  Perez  Julia. 

The  Embrace  of  St.  Francis  and  St.  Dominic,  0.40  x 
0.33,  to  D.  Felix  Maria  Eguidaga. 

St.  Ignatius  de  Loyola,  1.90x1.22;  a Child  Jesus 
wounding  himself  while  weaving  a Crown  of  Thorns, 
0.96x0.78;  a St.  John  the  Baptist,  1.79  x 1.17  and  a 
Monk,  0.62  X 0.42,  to  the  Marquis  de  la  Vega  Inclan. 

The  Portrait  of  Father  Francisco  Valderrama,  0.74  x 
0.62,  and  the  Portrait  of  Father  Rivera,  0.74  x 0.62, 
to  the  Baron  de  la  Vega  de  Hoz,  Count  of  Guadiana, 
and 

St.  Peter  weeping  for  his  fault,  1.06  x 0.86,  to  D.  Juan 
Manuel  Garcia  Flores. 


59 


IN  BARCELONA 


A }iead  of  St.  Francis,  o.8o  x o.6o,  belonging  to  D. 
Juan  Bautista  Jimeno. 


IN  CADIZ 

St.  Diego  de  Alcala,  0.94  x 1.00,  to  D.  Jose  Luis  de 
Sola  and  The  Virgin  of  the  Mercy  putting  a Scapular  on 
a Monk,  2.07  X 1.31,  to  D.  Juan  de  la  C.  Lavalle. 

IN  JEREZ  DE  LA  FRONTERA 

An  Immaculate  Conception  with  two  members  of  the 
lesser  clergy,  kneeling  at  her  feet,  2.52  x i .68,  to  D.  Pedro 
Aladro,  Prince  of  Albania. 

IN  SANLUCAR  DE  BARRAMEDA 

A St.  Francis,  medium  size,  to  the  heirs  of  the  widow  of 
Sr.  Hidalgo. 

IN  ECIJA 

Martyrdom  of  the  Carthusian  Monks,  1.70  x 2.15,  be- 
longing to  D.  Jose  Fernandez  Pintado,  also  a Votive  Pic- 
ture, 1.75  X 2.20. 

IN  SEVILLE 

A Child  Conception  (first  known  work  of  Zurbaran) 
1.95  X i-5'7;  the  Floly  Family,  2.47x2.00;  an  Incident 
in  the  Life  of  St.  Luis  Beltran,  0.34  x 1.19,  and  another 
Incident  in  the  Life  of  the  same  Saint  (companion  to  the 
former)  0.34  x 1.19,  to  the  heirs  of  D.  Jose  Maria  Lopez 
de  Cepero. 

A Carthusian  Moiik,  0.62  x 0.42,  to  D.  Gonzalo  Bil- 
bao, 

St.  Francis  de  Paula,  1.63  x 1.09,  to  D.  Jose  Macdou- 
gall. 


60 


CUKIS'l'  CROWXINC  jnSl'.l’H 
The  Louvre. 


1 


The  Child  Jesus  wounding  himself  while  weaving  a 
Crown  of  Thorns^  1.31  x 0.86,  to  D.  Cayetano  Sanchez 
Pineda,  resembling  that  which  D.  Gustavo  Morales  owns 
in  Madrid. 

Anthony^  1.49  x 1.97,  to  D.  Salvador  Cumplido. 

The  portraits  of  Don  Diego  Bustos  de  Lara,  2.00  x 1.04 
and  Don  Gonzalo  Bustos  de  Lara,  2.00  x 1.04,  to  the 
Count  de  Gomara. 

At.  Dominic  de  Guzman,  2.03  x 1.35',  to  D.  Francisco- 
Romero  Camavachuelo. 

A Monk,  1.20  X 0.93,  to  the  widow  of  Sr.  Albarracin. 

The  Birth  of  the  Child  Jesus,  belonging  to  Moema 
d’Anter,  and  Christ  expiring  on  the  Cross,  to  the  heirs  of 
Marquis  de  Villafuerte. 

This  last  picture  is  so  sublime,  that  in  the  opinion  of 
Sr.  Tormo,  it  is  the  most  finished  of  Zurbaran’s  paintings 
and  according  to  D.  Jose  Villegas,  director  of  the  Prado- 
Museum,  Velasquez  may  have  been  inspired  by  it  to  paint 
his  own  of  the  same  subject. 


61 


THE  PAINTINGS  OF  ZURBARAn 

In  the  Light  of  Criticism 

Knowing  the  life  of  the  man,  the  fortunes  and 
present  home  of  his  best  works,  by  which  the 
reader  may  form  an  idea  regarding  the  judgment 
which  Zurbaran  deserves  from  his  principal  biographers 
and  critics,  I will  reproduce  in  continuation  what  has  been 
written  of  him  and  his  canvases  by  Palomino,  Cean  Ber- 
mudez, Madrazo,  Araujo,  Blanc,  Cossio,  Sentenach,  Man- 
jarres,  Symons,  Mier,  Lefort,  F.  N.  L.  Tormo,  Rodriguez 
Codola,  Justi,  Romero  de  Torres,  Melida,  Villegas  and 
Alcantara. 

In  reference  to  the  paintings  of  SL  Veter  Nolasco  which 
are  preserved  in  the  second  cloister  of  the  Mercy  in 
Seville,  Don  Antonio  Palomino  says : 

“It  is  a delight  to  see  the  habits  of  the  friars  which, 
being  all  white,  are  distinguished  one  from  the  other  ac- 
cording to  the  position  in  which  they  happen  to  be,  with 
such  admirable  proportions  in  drawing,  color  and  texture, 
that  they  deceive  Nature  herself.  The  artist  was  so 
scrupulous  that  he  painted  all  draperies  on  manikins,  and 
the  flesh  after  nature;  thus  attaining  marvelous  effects, 
following  in  this  method  the  school  of  Carabacho,  whom 
he  so  much  resembled  that  those  who  had  seen  his  (Zur- 
baran’s)  works,  not  knowing  by  whom  they  were  painted, 
did  not  hesitate  to  attribute  them  to  Carabacho. 


62 


nil,  iii.i  ssi'.i)  .'vL(i\/.n  K(  )i >Ki( ;ri  /, 

Royal  Aiadc'iiiy  of  San  IVrnancIo,  Madrid. 


. .7 


j I '"ji 

iH; 


I 


>'I\  I.AWRI-,.\(  1, 

I lu-  llrrmitagc,  I’rlnigiad, 


“Of  such  kind  was  a painting”  (continues  Palomino) 
“called  The  Bitch  which  was  done  so  naturally  that  one 
feared  it  might  bark  at  those  who  looked  at  it;  and  there 
also  is  a figure  of  a youth  with  sleeves  of  cloth  of  silver, 
so  natural  that  anyone  would  know  of  what  material  they 
are  made.  An  amateur  in  Seville  owns  a little  lamb 
painted  by  this  artist,  after  nature,  which  he  prizes  more 
than  a hundred  live  ones.” 

In  the  same  sense  writes  Don  Juan  Augustin  Cean  Ber- 
mudez when  saying  that  as  soon  as  Zubaran  began  to 
gain  experience  “he  determined  not  to  paint  anything 
except  after  nature,  nor  any  drapery  not  copied  from  one 
worn  by  a manikin,  and  in  this  he  succeeded  in  being 
extremely  successful,  especially  in  white,  for  the  tone  and 
softness  he  produced.  He  imitated  Michael  Angelo 
Caravaggio  in  his  azure  tints,  and  in  the  force  of  his  claro- 
obscuro,  undoubtedly  from  having  copied  many  works  of 
that  artist  which  might  have  been  found  in  Seville,  but 
nothing  proves  that  he  himself  went  to  Italy.  Drawn 
with  correctness,  his  compositions  are  in  general  simple 
and  of  few  figures,  in  attitudes  both  serious  and  natural, 
taking  pains  in  embellishing  the  foreground  with  great 
spaces  of  light  and  shade,  with  which  he  obtained  a mar- 
velous effect. 

“His  greatest  work,  the  Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas  placed  Zurbaran  on  an  equality  with  the  most 
famous  painters  of  the  Lombard  School.” 

In  his  History  of  the  Art  of  Tainting.,  whose  manu- 
script still  remains  unedited  in  the  Archives  of  the  Royal 
Academy  of  San  Fernando,  the  same  Cean  Bermudez, 
speaking  of  Zurbaran,  says,  “he  was  the  honor  and  glory 
of  the  Andalusian  School,  the  Spanish  Caravaggio  with- 


63 


out  having  known  the  Italian,  and  without  ever  leaving 
Spain ; the  original  painter  who  did  not  imitate  in  style 
either  his  master  Roelas  or  any  other  Andalusian  who 
had  preceded  him;  being  the  first  to  study  nature’s  effects 
in  the  shade,  observing  the  tints  of  the  flesh  and  the  har- 
monies of  color ; whom  no  one  equalled  in  the  draping  of 
cloth,  nor  the  shading  and  softness  of  white.  He  drew 
with  fidelity  common  things  without  partiality,  but  knew 
how  to  give  character  to  his  figures ; composing  with  pre- 
cision and  economy,  he  avoided  the  overdoing  and  con- 
fusion of  objects,  and  the  repetition  of  foreshortenings. 
He  painted  with  great  masses  of  color,  with  much  force 
and  purity  and  in  effects  of  claro-obscuro  he  excelled  most 
of  the  Spanish  painters  as  well  as  those  of  other  coun- 
tries.” 

Mr.  Paul  Lafond  repeats  the  words  and  opinions  of 
Palomino  and  Cean  Bermudez,  without  adding  anything 
new  in  his  book  recently  published  in  Paris.^^ 

Also  D.  Pedro  Madrazo  coincides  with  the  others  in 
supposing  that  Zurbaran  “abandoned  himself  to  the  in- 
fluences of  the  works  of  Caravaggio,  whose  strength  of 
claro-obscuro  enchanted  him” ; and  he  goes  on  in  the  same 
article  declaring  “that  his  brush  was  powerful  and  rich 
though  sombre,  and  his  manner  of  painting  was  grand 
and  natural  in  the  draping  of  cloths,  especially  those  of 
white  wool.  . . . Above  all,  in  his  canvases  he  shows  a 
profound  study  of  Nature,  and  a method  entirely  per- 
sonal in  procuring  effects  of  claro-obscuro  united  to  the 
energy  of  Caravaggio  (whom  he  excels  in  truth,  particu- 
larly in  the  elevation  and  dignity  of  his  moral  sentiment) , 
and  to  a most  unique  art  in  effecting  the  annihilation  of 
certain  tints  by  great  masses  of  shade,  such  as  a photo- 


64 


SAX'I'A  RUFFIXA 

Property  of  Air.  Archer  AI.  Huntington.  Xcw  York. 


i 


i 


graph  gives  us.  We  might  almost  think  that  this  rare 
auxiliary  of  the  colorist  was  familiar  to  Zurbaran.” 

D.  Ceferino  Araujo  y Sanchez, speaking  of  the  like- 
ness that  former  biographers  of  Zurbaran  had  found  to 
Caravaggio,  says  very  definitely:  “It  will  be  well  to 

keep  in  mind  that  in  nothing  does  he  resemble  the  Italian 
painter  whose  works  probably  were  not  known  to  him,  or 
very  little.  If  the  sole  circumstance  of  a certain  resem- 
blance in  claro-obscuro  were  sufficient  to  assign  painters 
to  the  School  of  Caravaggio,  there  would  be  many  Spanish 
and  foreign  artists  who  ought  to  be  counted  in  that  list. 

“The  works  of  Zurbaran  are  very  numerous,  and  it 
would  be  tedious  to  name  them  all.  It  may  be  said  that 
they  are  dedicated  exclusively  to  religious  subjects,  and 
that  the  group  of  the  Labors  of  Hercules  is  a veritable 
exception  as  much  for  its  mythological  idea,  as  in  repre- 
senting the  nude,  a thing  which  (excepting  a single  figure 
of  Christ  painted  for  the  Convent  of  St.  Paul)  he  seldom 
did. 

“He  copied  heads  and  hands  from  life  and  draperies 
on  manikins. 

“He  is  undoubtedly  a great  painter,  but  one  has  to 
admire  in  him  study  and  talent  more  than  genius, 
the  reflection  more  than  the  sentiment  and  inspiration, 
although  he  occasionally  unites  these  last  two  qualities. 
His  largest  work  is  that  in  which  the  figures  are  more  than 
life-size : the  Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas. 

“It  has  always  been  considered  his  masterpiece,  but  it 
is  not;  yet  this  does  not  diminish  its  importance. 

“As  well,  in  the  general  composition  as  in  the  details  is 
the  method  of  procedure  of  this  great  artist  to  be  seen; 
he  studied  conscientiously  each  part  separately;  this  is 


why  he  lacks  unity  as  much  in  the  lines  as  in  the  color, 
and  also  lacks  true  expression.  Considered  in  detail, 
there  is  much  to  praise. 

“In  almost  all  the  pictures  preserved  in  the  Museum  of 
Seville,  the  same  manner  of  making  separate  studies  is 
seen ; astonishing  crudeness  in  the  accentuation  of  claro- 
obscuro  may  be  noticed,  and  the  color  is  sometimes  so 
browned  in  the  flesh,  as  in  Sf‘.  Gregory^  that  it  seems  al- 
most bronze. 

“In  The  Child  Jesus  making  a Crown  of  Thorns,  he  has 
achieved  true  and  poetic  expression;  also  in  St.  Francis 
of  Assisi. 

“Undoubtedly  one  of  the  most  complete  of  Zurbaran’s 
pictures  is  that  which  represents  the  Vision  of  St.  Peter 
Nolasco  in  which  the  drawing,  expression  and  color  are 
admirable. 

“A  noticeable  peculiarity  of  this  master  is  that,  on  some 
occasions,  he  likes  to  dress  angels  or  other  figures  with 
robes  of  deep  and  rigid  folds.  Excellent  in  its  kind  also 
is  the  collection  of  portraits  of  the  friars  of  the  Mercy, 
seen  in  the  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  although  the  color 
of  the  flesh  is  of  the  same  gold  bronze  mentioned  before 
in  the  St.  Gregory  of  Seville. 

“The  famous  Monk  in  Meditation,  in  the  National 
Gallery  of  London  is  also  a touching  figure.  It  impresses 
one  and  serves  to  prove  to  foreigners  the  correctness  of 
the  idea  which  they  have  about  the  sombreness  and 
silence,  the  mysticism  of  our  painters;  nevertheless  it  is 
an  exception  in  the  work  of  this  artist. 

“Zurbaran  did  not  delight  like  Ribera  in  ghastly  scenes 
of  martyrdom;  he  painted  the  life  of  the  cloister,  which 


66 


ST.  LUCIA 

The  Ehrich  Galleries,  New  ^'oI■k. 


is  quiet  and  composed;  ecstasies  and  visions  of  saints  in 
view  of  celestial  apparitions;  but  he  did  not  seek  the  dra- 
matic nor  that  which  held  much  movement.” 

Mr.  Ch.  Blanc  observes  very  opportunely  in  a History 
of  the  Fainters  of  all  Schools that  this  great  painter  was 
not  only  a proselyte  of  naturalism  in  his  epoch:  “He  had 
a passion  for  the  real  and  at  the  same  time  the  aspiration 
for  a catholic  ideal,  peculiar  to  a people  like  the  Spaniards, 
allured  by  the  glitter  of  material  things,  and  yet  leaning 
to  the  most  austere  asceticism.  This  duality  engendered 
in  the  mind  of  Zurbaran  those  qualities  by  which  he  is 
best  known,  an  expression  profoundly  mystical  and  re- 
ligious, and  an  almost  exalted  love  of  splendid  surround- 
ings, in  which  he  rivals  even  the  Venetian  masters,  in- 
cluding the  magnificent  Paul  Veronese.  That  which  is 
not  explicable  in  his  work  (except  by  the  misuse  of  the 
manikin)  is  his  strained  method  of  pleating  delicate 
stuffs,  as  gauze  and  silk,  etc.,  when  he  paints  angels  and 
such  ideal  figures,  whose  draperies  look  like  dampened 
paper.  . . . 

“When  he  painted  the  innumerable  saints  of  the  leg- 
ends, he  gave  them  an  unexpected  sweetness,  even  when 
mingled  with  the  indomitable  Spanish  pride  which  causes 
the  delicate  virgins  of  the  martyrdom  to  appear  like  arch- 
duchesses of  Toledo,  or  Princesses  of  Asturias.  I remem- 
ber that  like  a large  and  imposing  procession,  there  was  in 
the  old  Spanish  Museum  of  the  Louvre  a great  series  of 
standing  figures,  with  the  names  of  St.  Cecilia,  St.  Cathe- 
rine, St.  I?2ez,  St.  Lacy,  St.  Ursula,  bringing  to  life  again, 
with  the  most  brilliant  tones,  all  the  types  of  old  Spain. 
It  was  a pleasure  to  see  them  pass  by  in  the  background 


67 


of  their  delicate  frames,  gracious  and  swarthy,  passion- 
ate and  disdainful,  at  the  same  time,  haughty  as  the  Cas- 
tilian, and  gentle  as  the  Andalusian.  ... 

“The  Museum  of  the  Prado  contains  ^ St.  Casilda, 
clothed  in  the  prevailing  fashion  of  the  artist’s  day. 

“Zurbaran  drew  carefully,  composed  with  nobility  and 
simplicity,  painted  with  force,  nevertheless  he  often  sins 
with  hardness,  and  his  shadows  are  always  red  and,  mo- 
notonous. 

“In  his  compositions  the  way  of  procedure  is  noticeable : 
the  constant  careful  treatment  of  separate  details.  He 
always  has  grandeur  and  nobility,  while  talent  and  study 
compensate  for  lack  of  real  genius. 

“It  is  seldom  that  his  works  give  a vivid  or  profound 
impression,  but  they  always  breathe  gravity  and  a re- 
ligious devotion;  yet  they  do  not  merit  the  title  of 
mediocre  which  is  very  often  given  them.” 

D.  Manuel  Bartolome  Cossio,  whose  authority  is  of  the 
highest,  has  written  the  following  which  coincides  in 
many  points  with  the  criticism  given  by  Blanc.  With 
great  accuracy  Blanc  says:  “There  never  has  been  a 

painter,  not  excepting  Murillo,  who  has  better  reflected 
the  two  most  pronounced  tendencies  of  the  Spanish  char- 
acter, namely  a passion  for  reality,  and  an  aspiration  for 
the  ideal;  a singular  characteristic  of  a people  who  are 
seduced  by  the  beautiful  appeal  of  material  things,  and 
who,  nevertheless,  are  drawn  with  ease  toward  the  most 
exalted  and  subtle  spiritualism.  Zurbaran  was  indeed  a 
painter  entirely  local,  and  one  in  whom  we  are  able  to 
see  one  of  the  highest  and  purest  exponents  of  Spanish 
painting.  He  always  studied  Nature  directly,  and  is 
quite  as  robust  and  masculine  as  Ribera,  whom  he  re- 


68 


1 


♦ 


.1 

1 


sembled  in  the  claro-obscuro,  for  which  writers  have 
likened  him  to  Caravaggio. 

“Zurbaran  naturally  belongs  to  the  Andalusian  School 
of  painting,  and  yet  has  more  resemblance  to  Velasquez 
(who  passes  as  the  founder  of  the  School  of  Madrid)  than 
to  Murillo,  the  real  representative  of  the  former.  Zur- 
baran  and  Velazquez  are  of  the  same  family  in  point  of 
vigor  and  energy,  and  in  the  virility  with  which  they  con- 
ceived and  executed.  Without  deciding  upon  the  merits, 
great  or  small,  which  they  possessed,  it  is  clear  that  the 
tone  of  their  spirit  and  productions  is  quite  other  than 
Murillo’s,  and  that  they  are  in  more  accord  with  each 
other  than  with  the  latter  in  what  they  represent.  The 
figures  of  Zurbaran  are  very  individual,  the  characters 
full  of  life,  the  drawing  vigorous,  the  light  definite  and 
the  shadows  perfect;  and  he  excites  admiration  by  the  way 
he  paints  white  cloths,  although  the  arrangement  of  the 
draperies  at  times  is  forced.  His  greatest  picture  is  the 
Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas.,  in  the  Museum  of 
Seville,  a work  which  can  stand  beside  the  best  in  the 
world.  Of  the  other  paintings  in  the  Museum,  the  best 
is  St.  Bruno  before  Pope  Urban  II.” 

D.  Narciso  Sentenach,^^  speaking  of  this  artist,  says: 
“There  is  in  Zurbaran  much  thought,  an  observing  and 
somewhat  analytical  mind,  which  lifts  him  to  the  levels 
of  science  and  philosophy. 

“Enchanted  with  the  play  of  light  and  shade  which  he 
continually  saw  in  his  artistic  pathway,  he  turned  light 
on  objects,  and  his  projections  and  silhouettes  very 
quickly  thrown  on  the  canvas  make  him  noted  for  this 
method  of  procedure — it  is  the  characteristic  which  most 
distinguishes  him  and  constitutes  his  principal  charm. 


69 


“He  shows  in  this  mannerism  many  points  of  contact 
with  Velasquez,  in  his  first  period,  for  the  outlines  and 
masses  of  light  and  shade ; he  enjoys  studying  cloth  in  all 
its  drapings,  figures  posed  near  windows,  objects  placed 
in  the  sunshine  whenever  light  is  his  chief  fascination. 
But  this  he  obtained  with  the  highest  skill,  for  he  added 
to  the  finest  pencilling  a clean  palette  and  a vigorous 
touch;  for  him,  color  in  reality  does  not  exist;  it  is  light 
alone  which  he  tries  to  imprison  in  the  canvas,  making  his 
architectural  outlines  very  light  if  clear,  dense  if  obscure, 
always  with  the  closest  study. 

“Nevertheless,  he  is  the  artist  who  least  forgets  the 
practices  of  the  Academy,  and  therefore  seems  sometimes 
dry  and  hard  in  his  colors — cold  and  rigid,  also  little  flex- 
ible and  expressive  in  the  figures,  the  result  of  profound 
study  rather  than  spontaneous  grace.  Yet,  when  these 
qualities  are  to  be  applied  with  real  force,  as  in  subjects 
of  importance,  concerning  men  of  deep  knowledge  and 
high  philosophy,  all  the  defects  vanish  and  he  appears 
marvellous  and  surprising  to  our  eyes.” 

All  critics  do  not  praise  Zurbaran,  but  those  who  cen- 
sure him  show  either  ignorance  or  a lack  of  diligent  study 
of  his  works. 

D.  Jose  de  Manjarres  declares  that  “Zurbaran  is  in 
the  Sevillian  School  as  a lamp  isolated  in  a vestibule,  to 
lighten  the  way  into  the  reception  room.  In  his  compo- 
sitions he  gave  to  mysticism  the  character  of  a holy  phi- 
losophy, and  of  a wise  meditation  exercised  in  the  retire- 
ment of  the  cloisters;  he  scarcely  seemed  to  know  per- 
spective, he  saw  the  effects  of  light  in  a manner  so  par- 
ticular that  it  may  well  be  said  that  his  style  died  with  his 
immediate  pupils,  the  brothers  Polanco,  whose  works 


70 


ST.  M \R(  ;.\Ki',  r 

iliispitul  (if  the  111(1(1(1,  S(.'\'illc. 


could  almost  be  confounded  with  those  of  the  master. 
Antonio  del  Castillo  (1603-1667)  changed  his  style  by 
painting  studies  from  nature,  and  perhaps  the  realism 
which  he  transmitted  to  his  pupil  Valdes  Leal  was  so  ex- 
aggerated by  the  latter  that  it  caused  him  to  even  repre- 
sent things  of  repugnant  aspect.” 

Arthur  Symons  has  written  the  following  criticism  in 
the  Fortnighiiy  Review^  reprinted  in  the  United  States, 
about  Sevillian  Painters:  “In  the  thirty  or  forty  paint- 

ings by  Francisco  de  Zurbaran,  kept  in  Seville,  the  artist 
manifests  all  the  typical  characteristics  of  Spanish  paint- 
ing, without  being,  in  spite  of  this,  a mediocrity  in  whom 
we  could  not  discover  anything  of  real  personal  interest. 
Zurbaran  is  realistic  and  yet  does  not  attain  the  true  re- 
production of  life. 

“He  represents  persons  copied  from  nature,  in  whom 
emotion  is  to  be  reflected,  yet  he  paints  them  without  any. 
His  saints  and  holy  women  of  the  Civic  Hospital,  with 
their  fantastic  dresses  and  pensive  faces  resemble  gothic 
statues  painted  upon  canvas.  When  he  wishes  to  inter- 
pret emotion,  he  loses  sincerity  and  makes  pictures  like 
the  extravagant  holy  woman  who  is  seen  in  the  main 
sacristy,  in  an  improbable  ecstasy  before  a book  and  a 
skull.’’ 

With  more  knowledge  of  the  works  of  this  artist,  and 
showing  more  artistic  culture,  as  well  as  acting  with 
more  sagacity  than  Manjarres  and  Symons,  Sr.  Eduardo 
Mier  and  Paul  Lefort  have  expressed  opinions  which  are 
a synthesis  of  the  most  complete  and  accurate  opinions 
that,  up  to  this  time,  have  been  pronounced  about  Zur- 
baran, and  coincide  in  many  cases  with  the  authorized 
judgment  of  Sr.  Cossio. 


71 


D.  Eduardo  Mier  has  written  thus:  “Francisco  de 
Zurbaran,  like  other  Spanish  artists,  compared  with  the 
most  celebrated  of  Italy,  should  not  be  judged  by  what  he 
did,  but  rather  by  what  he  would  have  done  had  he  had 
the  advantages  they  possessed  . . . the  energy  and  vigor 
of  his  brush,  the  spontaneity  and  purity  of  his  artistic 
conception,  the  magnificent  coloring,  correct  drawing, 
simplicity  and  good  taste  of  his  composition,  qualify  him 
as  one  of  the  painters  most  worthy  of  being  studied  by 
the  modern  artists  who,  in  general,  endeavor  to  imitate 
and  sometimes  slavishly  copy  the  French  masters.  . . . 

“We  are  led  to  believe  that  even  before  he  worked  on 
his  own  accord,  he  observed  many  prudent  principles 
whose  effects  are  noticeable  in  his  pictures,  for  instance 
never  to  paint  anything  except  from  nature  nor  draperies 
except  upon  manikins,  an  art  in  which  he  excelled  to 
such  an  extent  that  he  may  well  be  considered  the  model 
of  Spanish  painters.  Whatever  the  attitude  of  his 
model  was,  the  garments  are  always  marked  by  the  grace- 
ful and  natural  shape  of  the  folds,  by  the  propriety  and 
good  taste  of  their  arrangement,  and  by  the  special  and 
judicious  study  which  the  artist  had  made  of  this  most 
essential  part  of  his  profession.  . . . 

“The  subjects  of  his  canvases  (excepting  those  painted 
for  our  royal  palaces)  are  almost  exclusively  religious, 
either  on  account  of  the  churches  or  monasteries  for  which 
they  were  destined,  or  as  a consequence  of  the  general 
spirit  of  his  epoch,  which  had  not  yet  descended  from 
heaven  to  earth,  or  from  religion  to  history;  or,  finally, 
perhaps  because  his  strong  and  sincere  faith,  and  the 
grandeur  and  energy  of  his  sublime  sentiment  gave  pow- 
erful wings  to  his  imagination  whereby  it  soared  into  the 
heaven  of  art.  . . . 


72 


riii.  Axxrxri.vi'K >x 

( 'olli/ttinn  of  till-  ( 'ountL-ss  of  I’aris,  Chatoau  of  Randan,  Auvrr.unc. 


“Classical  painter  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word,  on  ac- 
count of  his  exactness,  good  taste  and  simplicity,  he  al- 
most always  has  few  figures  in  his  canvases,  all  in  digni- 
fied and  natural  attitudes,  grouping  them  with  order  and 
wisdom,  without  falling  into  an  extreme  and  traditional 
symmetry,  nor  into  disorder  and  confusion.  Since  he 
drew  with  correctness  and  used  colors  and  claro-obscuro 
with  great  facility,  it  is  not  surprising  that  his  works 
should  have  produced  such  marvellous  effects.  He  us- 
ually finished  the  figures  of  the  foreground  with  great 
masses  of  light  and  shade,  decreasing  in  the  background 
the  power  and  energy  of  his  touch.  For  that  reason  he 
may  have  been  called  the  Spanish  Caravaggio,  the  result 
of  his  broad  and  particular  manner  of  interpreting  art 
having  been  attributed  to  a servile  spirit  of  imitation. 
Beside  the  fact  that  the  works  of  this  artist  have  never 
been  well  known  in  our  country,  it  is  right  to  keep  in 
mind  that  Zurbaran  did  not  leave  Spain,  and  that  the 
same  idea  may  occur  in  distinct  places  and  times  to 
two  artists,  as  a consequence  of  a general  cause,  rather 
than  individual  motives — and  that  between  Zurbaran 
and  Caravaggio  there  is  the  same  difference  which  exists 
between  moderation  and  excess,  a medium  and  an  ex- 
treme. 

“Zurbaran  is  at  the  same  time  more  modest,  more  judi- 
cious, and  firmer  and  more  sensible  in  his  artistic  convic- 
tions. . . . 

“Caravaggio  is  among  painters  what  Proudhon  is 
among  politicians.  . . . 

“All  extreme  is  vicious  in  the  world  of  art,  and  the 
conventional  style  of  Zucaro  is  as  ridiculous  and  con- 
trary to  his  as  the  madness  and  luxury  of  freedom  which 


73 


distinguish  Caravaggio.  We  find  nothing  like  this  in 
Zurbaran,  so  it  is  not  strange  that  we  do  not  agree  in 
calling  him  the  Spanish  Caravaggio.  Call  Zurbaran 
himself  alone,  no  more,  no  less,  and  it  is  not  necessary  to 
use  any  metaphors  or  outside  appellations. 

“The  proof  of  this  assertion  we  find  without  much 
trouble  by  comparing  Zurbaran  with  a French  painter 
whom  he  so  much  resembles  that  the  same  analogies  have 
been  seen  in  him  in  regard  to  Zurbaran  as  in  Zurbaran 
in  regard  to  Caravaggio.  Leopold  Robert,  who  without 
having  ever  been  in  Spain  or  having  studied  the  works  of 
Zurbaran,  and  probably  without  having  seen  any  of  them, 
or  possibly  heard  of  them  or  of  their  author,  appears  very 
much  like  him  in  his  principles  of  execution.  The  out- 
lines somewhat  hard,  the  pleating  of  draperies,  the  dis- 
tribution of  light  and  shade,  the  transparencies  which  are 
never  entirely  white,  and  the  shadows  which  are  never 
quite  black,  show  without  any  doubt,  that  there  may  be 
between  two  artists,  especially  two  painters,  analogies, 
resemblances  and  even  absolute  identities  though  each 
is  original.  . . .” 

Being  of  the  same  opinion  as  D.  Eduardo  Mier, 
Mr.  Paul  Lefort  says:  “In  all  his  works  one  may  ob- 

serve that  costumes,  fabrics  and  inanimate  objects  are 
expressed  with  extreme  truth.  . . . 

“Entrusted  with  the  decorations  of  the  high  altar  of  the 
church  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  Zurbaran  found  the  op- 
j)ortunity  to  execute,  if  not  his  best  work,  at  least  his 
largest  one. 

“It  represents  the  Apotheosis  of  St.  Thof/ias  Aquinas, 
now  forming  a part  of  the  collection  in  the  provincial 
Museum  of  Seville.  All  the  figures  are  larger  than  life- 


74 


Tin-:  ciKcrMrisK  )N 

rollrction  of  tlie  Countess  of  I’aiis.  ('Iiatrau  of  Randan,  Auvergne. 


size.  The  clouds  are  opened  where  Christ  and  the  Virgin 
accompanied  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Dominic  are  seen  in 
glory.  St.  Thomas  stands  among  the  four  doctors  of  the 
Church,  and  the  model  for  his  figure  was  a canon, friend 
of  Zurbaran. 

“In  the  foreground  of  the  lower  part  of  the  picture,  in 
a group  on  the  right,  Charles  V is  represented  holding  the 
sceptre,  covered  with  the  imperial  cloak,  and  kneeling 
among  monks  and  persons  of  his  suite.  At  the  left  is 
Archbishop  Diego  Deza,  founder  of  the  church,  accom- 
panied by  some  monks  and  members  of  the  clergy. 

“It  is  clearly  seen,  in  studying  this  production  of  Zur- 
baran, what  were  the  sources  and  examples  that  inspired 
him  to  compose  and  execute  it.  Roelas  in  his  master- 
piece the  Death  of  St.  Isidor,  and  Herrera  the  elder  in  his 
Triumph  of  St.  Hermenegildo  of  the  Jesuit  College, 
painted  in  1624,  one  year  before  Zurbaran  finished  his 
St.  Thomas  Aquinas.,  have  each  in  their  own  way,  influ- 
enced the  early  ideas  of  the  artist  whom  his  compatriots 
have  called  (no  one  knows  why)  the  Spanish  Caravaggio. 
Zurbaran  never  was  in  Italy;  he  did  not  study  with  Cara- 
vaggio, who  died  in  1609,  neither  did  he  know  his  works, 
except  perhaps  when  he  was  of  mature  age,  and  when 
his  strong  personal  talent  was  no  more  to  be  modified. 
But  in  1620-25  Zurbaran  had  opportunity  to  see  in 
Seville  some  of  Ribera’s  paintings,  recalling  the  style  of 
Caravaggio.  For  the  rest,  there  is  no  doubt  that  Zur- 
baran during  his  career  both  admired  and  assimilated 
some  of  the  solid  manner  of  the  Espaholeto  (Ribera) 
and  this  without  altering  in  the  least  his  own  origin- 
ality. 

Studying  the  five  portraits  of  the  dignitaries  of  the 


IS 


Order  of  the  Mercy  which  are  preserved  in  the  Academy 
of  San  Fernando,  Lefort  estimates  them  thus; 

“Each  countenance  was  studied  and  expressed  by  the 
artist  in  its  real  and  particular  character.  , . . 

“In  regard  to  the  execution  of  these  portraits  which 
stand  out  from  the  background  in  the  most  vigorous  re- 
lief, it  would  be  difficult  to  give  proofs  of  more  firmness 
and  character — at  the  same  time,  one  would  look  in  vain 
to  find  a rival  to  their  creator  for  the  admirable  perfec- 
tion with  which  the  white  habits  are  painted. 

“Like  Ribera,  Zurbaran  did  not  always  choose  gloomy 
and  sombre  subjects  realistically  expressed.  He  under- 
stood how  to  use  more  flexible  themes,  less  exclusive  and 
even  if  necessary  full  of  grace  and  enchantment  when  he 
had  to  represent  the  beautiful  figure  of  a martyr  or  a holy 
woman.  As  he  liked  to  paint  them  with  rich  or  pictur- 
esque costumes,  he  found  on  his  palette  the  most  vibrant 
and  florid  tones  to  render  silken  cloths,  and  satin  em- 
broidered with  gold  with  which  he  adorned  them. 
Among  these  gracious  pictures  we  may  cite : St.  Casilda 
of  the  Museum  of  Madrid,  St.  Apolina  of  the  ancient 
Spanish  collection  in  the  Louvre,  and  all  the  virgins  and 
martyrs  dressed  like  princesses  or  peasants  which  decorate 
the  Hospital  of  the  Blood  in  Seville,  for  which  they  were 
expressly  painted  by  the  artist.” 

“Zurbaran  is  in  Lefort’s  opinion  a grand  figure  and  oc- 
cupied a very  distinguished  place  in  the  constellation  of 
artists  of  genius  who  gave  such  brilliancy  to  that  period 
of  the  Spanish  School.  With  a deeply  penetrating  re- 
ligious sentiment,  more  virile  than  in  Murillo,  more  ex- 
pressive, in  another  way,  than  Velasquez,  his  naturalism 
as  robust  as  Ribera’s  is  perhaps  even  more  true,  more 


76 


ST.  ]\IAKG,\KI.'I' 
National  (iallcry,  London. 


I 

1 

I 

1 


1 


frank  and  more  spontaneous.  His  genial  simplicity, 
which  his  sincere  faith  explains,  is  similar  to  that  of 
primitive  people  whose  simple  and  candid  inspiration, 
austere  and  constant  dignity,  he  recalls. 

“No  contemporary  painting  showed  better  than  that  of 
Zurbaran  why  naturalism,  the  dominant  characteristic  of 
Spanish  art  in  its  apogee,  differs  from  the  interpretation 
of  realities  as  understood  and  set  forth  by  the  great  mas- 
ters of  Venice,  Flanders  and  Holland,  of  the  XVIIth 
century,  excepting,  of  course,  some  of  the  sublime  works 
of  Rembrandt  and  the  admirable  Communioii  of  St. 
Francis  of  Assisi,  which  for  its  force  of  expression  is  a 
unique  page  in  the  work  of  Rubens. 

“If  Spanish  realism  does  not  possess  the  brilliancy  and 
sumptuous  richness  of  the  former,  who  painted  a subject 
from  the  Gospel  with  the  same  magnificence  of  treat- 
ment and  absence  of  emotion  as  he  did  any  mythological 
motive,  neither  has  it  anything  of  the  positive  method, 
uninspired  and  mildly  subjective  of  the  Flemish  or 
Dutch  contemporaries,  who  certainly  were  practical,  but, 
as  Fromentin  says,  could  also  do  without  imagination.” 

In  the  review  Blanco  y Negro  (Black  and  White)  of 
May  27,  1905,  an  article  signed  with  the  initials 
F.  N.  L,,®^  appeared  in  regard  to  the  Exposition  then 
in  progress,  and  runs  as  follows : 

“Zurbaran  so  far  as  he  may  be  judged  from  what  is 
seen  in  this  Exposition,  where  such  important  works  as 
those  of  Guadalupe  and  the  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  of 
Seville  are  missing,  is  not  Velasquez,  nor  Ribera,  nor 
Murillo,  but  he  has  something  of  all  three.  In  different 
canvases  one  sees  the  great  labor,  the  tenacious  force  and 
determination  which  it  cost  him  to  create  for  himself  a 


77 


robust  and  frank  personality.  Here  and  there  are  seen 
heads  of  Christ  and  Virgins  of  the  color  of  dust  and 
browned  wood,  firmly,  proudly  moulded  like  those  of 
Luis  de  Morales,  countryman  and  perhaps  master  or  in- 
spirer  of  Zurbaran.  Further  on,  part  of  a tunic  with 
ample  folds  of  winey  color  and  a large  figure  with  a pale 
little  head:  they  tell  us  of  the  perplexity  of  Zurbaran 
when  he  saw  for  the  first  time  the  astonishing  pictures  of 
Theotocopulos;  there  a face  crudely  darkened  speaks  of 
the  influence  which  sometimes  those  extremely  severe 
Sevillians,  Herrera  the  elder  and  Roelas,  had  upon  the 
mind  of  Zurbaran;  still  further  on,  we  encounter  a St. 
Francis  de  Faiil  which  may  be  attributed  to  Espanoleto. 
A little  while  afterward  appears  the  crafty  and  pompous 
figure  of  a mercenary  friar  whose  frown  like  a Sevillian 
bull-fighter’s,  and  whose  mouth  like  that  of  a Triana 
town-crier  seem  to  have  been  seen  and  painted  by  the 
Velasquez  of  The  Beggars;  at  the  last,  not  far  from  this 
one,  the  sweetly  mystical  figure  of  the  Beatified  Henry 
Suz6j2,  a most  beautiful  dreamer  who  presses  to  his  bosom 
a bistoury,  smiling  with  happy  grief  or  anguished  delight. 
H is  lifted  head,  wrapped  in  a soft  crepuscular  hue, 
without  doubt,  might  be  attributed  to  Murillo.  Then 
will  someone  say — Zurbaran  had  no  resolute,  clear  and 
artistic  personality*?  . . . 

“Indeed,  he  has;  but  we  must  not  seek  it  in  the  show- 
iest pictures,  nor  in  the  most  celebrated  ones,  nor  in  the 
pompous  and  somewhat  oratorical  conception  of  the 
Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  which  we  admire  in 
the  Museum  of  Seville.  Neither  in  the  Visit  of  St. 
Bruno  to  Pope  Urban  II  in  spite  of  the  marvellous  fine- 
ness of  both  heads.  We  must  not  seek  it  either  in  the 


78 


ST.  IGNATIUS  LOYOL.\ 
The  Ehrich  Galleries,  New  York. 


S T.  I.(  )ris  RAX 

I'rovincial  Ah'.scum  (jf  Si  \illc. 


I 


three  pictures  of  ecstasy  which  figure  in  this  Exposition, 
and  seem  to  be  painted  from  one  invariable  recipe;  the 
Jubilee  of  St.  Francis,  St.  Bruno  at  Prayer,  and  the 
Blessed  Alonso  Rodriguez,  though  this  last  one  is,  in 
places,  a work  of  impetuosity.  The  celestial  clouds  of 
Zurbaran  do  not  convince  us ; they  are  not  subtle,  vapor- 
ous and  ideal  like  those  of  Murillo,  nor  are  they  as  boldly 
and  proudly  extravagant,  as  superhuman  as  those  of 
Greco,  which  they  in  a manner  resemble. 

“Where  Zurbaran’s  fine,  pure  and  pronounced  person- 
ality is  evident,  is  not  exactly  in  the  great  composition, 
for  which  he  lacked  broadness  of  judgment,  but  in  those 
pictures  of  single  figures,  the  best  of  which  are  shown  in 
the  Museum  of  the  Prado.  Let  us  examine  carefully  the 
small  pictures  of  the  provincial  museum  of  Cadiz,  and 
above  all  the  Cardinal  Nicolaus  and  the  holy  Carthusian 
Martyr  who  holds  his  heart  in  his  hand.  A critic  will  say 
that  the  painting  of  these  habits  of  white  cloth  is  incom- 
parable as  to  the  execution.  Those  who  are  not  technical 
critics  will  declare  that  there  is  in  these  figures  a sincerity 
of  sentiment  which  an  artist  only  can  reach  when,  as  some- 
one said,  he  paints  con  amore.  Here  is  neither  research 
nor  exaggeration,  no  violence  whatever,  nor  pretence, 
and  indeed  the  most  profound  impression  overwhelms 
us  when  we  see  the  enchanting  figure  of  the  Carthusian 
who  offers  his  pure  heart,  bloodless  and  ardent,  without 
having  the  whiteness  of  his  habit  stained  by  drops  of 
blood. 

“But  even  this  is  trifling;  the  best  of  his  works  are 
Zurbaran’s  three  holy  women,  evidently  painted  from 
the  same  model,  whom  the  artist  must  have  loved  to  dis- 
traction: St.  Inez,  the  handsome  virgin  who  holds  in 


79 


her  left  hand  a tender  and  innocent  lamb,  and  in  the  right 
a beautiful  palm  branch;  SL  Casilda,  the  lovely  and 
noble  lady  in  regal  attire,  with  adorable  hands  and  of  ma- 
jestic attitude;  lastly  the  sorrowful,  ecstatic  and  sup- 
pliant St.  Catherine  of  Siena.,  crowned  with  thorns, 
marked  in  the  hands  like  Christ.  Her  eyes  are  fixed  on 
the  crucifix,  the  prayer  book  is  open  before  her,  and  from 
its  leaves  love  has  issued  in  words  which  no  longer  sound 
to  the  ears  of  the  Saint,  but  which  contain  sentiments 
now  floating  in  her  cloistered  soul,  already  far  from  the 
things  of  this  world. 

“We  see  this  same  sublime  sentiment  expressed  in  the 
St.  Francis  of  Assisi  exhibited  by  Sr.  Beruete  and  in  some 
other  pictures,  all  of  mystical  subjects,  and  each  of  a sin- 
gle figure.  Zurbaran  was  a monologist.  As  we  under- 
stand it,  this  is  what  makes  Zurbaran  not  only  a great 
painter,  but  one  distinct  from  all  others.” 

Sr.  Elias  Tormo  y Monzo  has  said,  referring  to  the  pic- 
tures at  Guadalupe, where  he  studied  them  directly  in 
the  famous  monastery : 

“For  the  artist,  there  is  nothing  of  so  much  interest  as 
the  gems  of  Zurbaran  in  the  sacristy. 

“The  very  copious  archives  of  the  Sanctuary,  carefully 
kept  from  of  old,  gave  in  the  XVIIIth  century  to  those 
learned  writers  Ponz  and  Cean  Bermudez  all  the 
data  they  could  wish  upon  the  painting  and  sculp- 
ture, the  iron  grill  work,  and  the  gold  and  silver  treasures 
of  the  Monastery.  In  the  published  histories  of  the  same 
institution  it  is  to  be  observed,  however,  that  of  the 
artistic  collection  of  the  sacristy  and  the  chapel  of  St. 
Jerome,  and  the  Zurbaran  paintings  which  enrich  them, 
absolutely  nothing  was  known  except  what  appears  on 


8o 


STUDi:.\T  OF  THF  rXI\ERSITV  OF  SALAMANCA 
Collection  of  Mrs.  John  Lowell  Gardner,  lioston. 


% 


the  walls.  The  signature  of  Zurbaran  is  entirely  visible 
on  two  pictures  with  the  dates,  until  now  unknown,  of 
1638  and  1639;  as  well  as  the  Latin  inscriptions  below 
them  which  tell  under  what  Prior  these  works  were  begun 
in  1638,  and  continued  and  finished  in  1647.  I carefully 
searched  in  the  once  rich  archives,  much  mutilated  after 
so  many  changes  of  time  and  place,  though  in  vain. 
There  I saw  precious  evidences  of  a hundred  different 
things,  but  nothing  referring  to  Zurbaran  and  the 
sacristy.  It  is  true  that  upon  one  of  the  empty  chests, 
among  dozens  of  them,  there  were  written  the  follow- 
ing words  and  signatures  which  make  us  regret  the  loss 
of  its  contents.  ‘Box  I.  Account  of  Works,  Drawings 
and  Expenses.  . . .’ 

“Numbers  1 1 and  20,®®  of  the  reproductions  in  the  cata- 
logue of  the  collection  clearly  indicate  the  importance 
of  the  sacristy  and  the  chapel  at  the  end,  which  was 
dedicated  to  the  founder  of  the  Order,  St.  Jerome. 
One  cannot  say  that  it  is  a servile  imitation  of  the  sacristy 
of  the  Escurial,  but  one  may  note  the  fact  that  the  mother 
monastery  was  in  keen  emulation  with  the  daughter  con- 
vent. The  greatness  of  the  Community  and  of  the  Prior 
who  originated  similar  work,  is  shown  in  the  unity  of 
thought  that  prevails  in  it;  not  only  the  importance  of 
Zurbaran’s  paintings,  but  also  the  harmony  of  design, 
execution,  and  singleness  of  style  are  the  cause  of  the  at- 
traction that  charms  and  penetrates  the  mind.  Here  they 
truly  seem  fitted  to  the  unchangeable  peace  of  the  clois- 
ters, in  the  period  before  the  expulsion  of  the  friars  of 
the  Order  of  St.  Jerome,  today  no  more.  Their  patron 
presides  from  an  altar,  represented  by  a statue  which  is  a 
reproduction  or  rather  an  imitation  in  wood  of  the  mar- 


81 


vellous  one  in  terra-cotta  done  by  Pedro  Torrigiano,  and 
which  the  Jeronimites  gave  to  the  provincial  Museum  of 
Seville  in  the  XIXth  century;  it  is,  according  to  Goya, 
the  finest  work  of  sculpture  in  Spain.  The  altar-piece 
represents  the  apotheosis  of  the  Saint,  a picture  called 
“The  Pearl  of  Zurbaran”;  in  the  pedestal,  in  the  sup- 
ports, upon  the  table  of  the  altar  are  eight  small  panels 
of  holy  men  and  women  of  the  Order,  little  paintings  in 
the  style  of  Zurbaran,  although  perhaps  not  done  by  his 
own  hand.  Upon  each  side  of  this  chapel  of  the  Saint, 
rest  two  great  paintings  The  Temptations  of  St.  Jerome 
when  praying  in  the  Desert  of  Syria.,  and  the  whip- 
pings where  in  the  presence  of  Christ  he  is  subjected,  by 
various  angels,  to  severe  punishment  for  having  taken 
too  much  pleasure  in  reading  the  profane  classics 
of  antiquity  (‘strong  lashings  given  because  he  read 
Cicero’) .” 

In  the  centre  of  this  chapel  hangs  the  great  lantern  of 
the  Turkish  admiral’s  ship  taken  at  the  battle  of  Lepanto, 
which  D.  Juan  of  Austria  offered  to  the  Virgin. 

The  sacristy  itself,  being  by  its  nature  less  influenced 
by  the  rigors  of  the  canonical  law,  and  the  decisions  of 
the  Council  of  the  ritual,  was  conceived  by  the  Prior  of 
the  convent  as  a graphic  testimony  to  the  pious  legends 
and  glorious  actions  (not  as  yet  sanctioned  by  Rome)  of 
the  Fathers  who  ruled  or  ennobled  the  house  with  the 
aroma  and  prestige  of  their  virtues. 

The  mural  paintings  in  the  segments  of  the  ceiling 
record  the  life  of  St.  Jerome.  The  eight  great  pictures  ” 
embedded  in  the  walls,  in  separate  frames  in  the  spaces 
between  the  windows,  on  the  right  side  south,  represent 
the  life  and  miracles  not  of  the  patron  or  the  saints, 


82 


A IloI.A'  ( AR  IHUSl  AX  AT  \K  I AK 
I'l  ovinci.'il  Museum  of  Cfadiz. 


fn 


or  the  beatified  ones  of  the  Order,  but  of  the  an- 
cient members  whose  life  and  miracles  had  not  obtained 
the  sanction  of  the  supreme  Church.  It  might  have  been 
the  Prior,  Father  Diego  de  Mantalvo,  who  conceived  the 
idea,  or  perhaps  Father  Juan  de  Toledo  who  wrote  all  the 
inscriptions  in  Latin  corresponding  to  the  canvases. 
These  were  by  a wonderful  coincidence,  entrusted 
to  the  painter  of  austerity  and  religious  subjects,  to 
whom  the  eternal  feminine  never  appealed,  but  who 
put  into  the  art  of  the  XVIIth  century  the  same  feeling 
with  which,  two  centuries  before,  the  Blessed  Angelico 
of  Fiesole  enlightened  the  dawn  of  the  Florentine 
Renaissance. 

Zurbaran  at  that  time  was  finishing  the  series  of  his 
masterly  work  in  the  Carthusian  Monastery  of  Jerez, 
consecrated  to  the  mysteries  of  the  Birth  of  Jesus,  the 
Annunciation,  the  Nativity,  the  Epiphany  and  the  Cir- 
cumcision, on  one  of  which,  filled  with  gratification,  he 
signed  “Francisco  de  Zurbaran,  painter  to  King  Philip, 
in  1638.”  Either  alone,  or  with  collaborators,  he  had 
also  painted  the  other  small  pictures  of  the  pedestal  or 
of  the  plinth;  and  alone,  completely  alone,  those  on  wood, 
representing  the  angels,  censer-bearers  and  some  holy 
Carthusians  in  isolated  figures,  smaller  than  life-size, 
which  were  on  the  doors  and  passages  leading  to  the  choir 
of  the  celebrated  Carthusian  of  Jerez. 

Those  four  great  paintings,  formerly  owned  by  the 
Duke  of  Montpensier  and  now  the  property  of  the 
Countess  of  Paris,  and  the  smaller  ones  which  are  the 
grace  and  pride  of  the  Museum  of  Cadiz,  manifest  the 
plenitude  and  the  apogee  of  Zurbaran’s  characteristic 
technique.  It  is  shown  in  his  singular  style  of  colored 


shadows,  his  Christian  inspiration  and  warm,  almost 
childlike  enthusiasm  for  varieties  of  color;  in  the  strong 
but  extreme  softness  and  delicacy  with  which  he  draws 
and  models,  giving  at  times,  even  to  the  hands  of  his 
subjects,  a sentiment  and  expression  of  melancholy  life, 
of  mystical  tenderness,  simple,  personal,  penetrating  and 
touching. 

“Most  happy  was  the  moment  when  the  artistic  tem- 
perament of  the  painter  of  cloisters  and  asceticism  coin- 
cided with  the  purposes  of  the  Prior  of  Guadalupe.  Zur- 
baran  was  charged  with  a commission  suitable,  as  none 
other  could  have  been,  to  his  powers,  to  the  elements  of 
his  art,  and  to  his  inspired  predilection;  pious  legends  of 
the  monks  of  the  XVth  century,  white  or  grey  and  black 
habits  (white  cloth  being  his  favorite  subject),  figures 
exclusively  masculine,  with  an  environment  of  serene 
contemplation,  of  penetrating  spirituality,  of  prayer, 
sometimes  rewarded  by  Heaven  with  noble  gifts  of  divine 
recompense. 

“As  to  this,  neither  elsewhere  in  the  work  of  Zurbaran 
in  that  of  Murillo,  nor  even  of  the  divine  Fra  Angelico, 
can  be  found  any  inspiration  so  vivid,  so  sensitive,  so  firm 
and  so  delicate  as  that  which  guided  the  artist  to  paint 
the  figure  of  Father  Salmeron  receiving  on  his  forehead 
the  hand  of  the  Saviour,  who  appears  to  him  and  rewards, 
by  the  most  loving  gesture,  his  vow  to  go  perpetually 
on  his  knees  which  the  young  disciple  of  the  Jeronimite 
rule  was  fulfilling.  In  this  hand,  correctly  drawn, 
simply  modeled,  laid  lightly  on  the  forehead  with  ex- 
quisite candor,  Zurbaran  perhaps  arrived  at  the  greatest 
triumph  of  his  pencil,  and  the  supreme  eloquence  of  his 
chaste  heart,  pure  and  artistically  unpolluted.  El  Greco 


84 


■MAsri-.K  I'KIAR  JI-.RoMMn  ri-.RI.Z 
Royal  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  Madrid 


himself  was  not  a greater  extremist  in  drawing  hands,  or 
transforming  and  attenuating  the  heads  of  his  subjects, 
which  he  intentionally  rendered  cadaverous  or  pallid. 
The  hands  and  the  heads  of  El  Greco  are  the  ne  plus 
ultra  of  morbid  asceticism  in  the  history  of  mystical 
Christian  art. 

“Merely  to  see  the  picture  of  Father  Sahneron  and  to 
feel  the  gesture  of  the  hand  that  caresses  him,  artists 
ought  to  undertake  the  voyage  to  Guadalupe,  and  pious 
people  should  make  a pilgrimage  to  the  chapel  of  the 
Virgin. 

“Before  the  picture  of  Father  S aimer 6?i,  as  to  inspira- 
tion, all  other  paintings  of  Zurbaran  fade.  Superior  to 
it,  in  grace  and  beauty  of  composition  and  drawing,  is 
the  Apotheosis  of  St.  Jerome.,  where  the  angels  of  the 
background  seem  the  model,  the  highest  impulse  of  the 
art  of  Murillo  (at  that  time  in  the  twenties).  Superior 
also,  as  an  example  of  solid  painting,  realism  and  exactr 
ness,  is  the  portrait  of  some  prior  of  the  epoch  who  served 
as  model  for  the  head  of  the  famous  Father  Illescas,  con- 
fessor of  John  II,  co-regent  or  co-governor  of  Castile, 
Bishop  of  Cordova,  who  is  pictured  seated,  writing  at  a 
table  covered  with  books  and  papers  among  which,  as  in  a 
letter,  we  see  the  signature  of  Zurbaran,  and  the  date 
1639.  This  painting  is  worthy  of  such  a name,  for  the 
supreme  verity  of  art  which  created  it.  Great  truth  and 
veritable  art  is  no  less  shown  in  another  picture  at  Guad- 
alupe, in  which  the  drops  of  blood  are  seen  falling  into 
the  chalice,  from  the  paten  raised  with  the  Eucharistic 
Host  above  the  altar.  This  miracle  happened  to  Father 
Cabanuelas  when  this  most  devoted  monk  was  seized 
with  the  doubt  whether  the  bread  and  the  wine,  after 


85 


consecration,  really  became  the  flesh  and  blood  of  our 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ.  The  picture  of  the  acolyte,  un- 
conscious of  the  scene,  is  another  portrait  of  genuine 
truth,  and  it  would  be  sufficient,  if  the  head  of  the  cele- 
brant were  not  superior  still,  to  give  to  the  Mass  of 
Father  Cabanuelas^  signed  by  Zurbaran  in  1638,  a rank 
of  honor  in  the  history  of  eucharistic  art,  between  the 
fresco  of  the  Mass  of  Bolsena  by  Raphael,  and  the  paint- 
ing of  the  Holy  Body  by  Claudio  Coello. 

“Including  the  picture  of  the  high  altar  called  ‘The 
Pearl,’  we  have  mentioned  the  three  principal  works  of 
Zurbaran,  held  by  the  monks  of  Guadalupe.  These 
three  pictures.  Father  Salmeron,  Father  Illescas  and 
Father  Cabanuelas  are  placed  together  on  a well  lighted 
wall  in  the  centre  of  the  light  in  this  sacristy  which  has 
been  able  to  keep  to  the  present  day  all  the  works  made 
for  it  and  thus  enjoys  a good  fortune  that  was  denied 
to  the  Capuchin  Convent  of  Seville,  once  richly  adorned 
with  the  paintings  of  Murillo  which  now  decorate  the 
Sevillian  Museum  of  Art. 

“How  greatly  these  pictures  gain  by  being  preserved 
where  their  artistic  creator  wished  to  place  them!  The 
selection  and  relation  of  light,  shadows  and  colors,  is  re- 
markable not  only  in  one  painting  at  Guadalupe,  but  in 
the  entire  collection.  These  three  signed  pictures  are  in 
full  light,  on  the  north  wall.  This  plenitude  of  painted 
light,  although  subdued,  and  the  most  characteristic  of 
Zurbaran’s  light,  contrasts  with  the  paintings  that  are 
between  the  windows.  In  the  latter  the  artist  might  have 
had  the  boldness  to  display  a greater  illumination  by  his 
pencil,  but  working  with  more  prudence  and  security, 
he  decided  that  they  should  be  his  darkest  canvases.  In 


86 


1 III-.  i)Ar(;irn:Rs  ni'  jr.w  dk  kokf.as 
'I'lic  I'Aiiidi  ( la lli  rics.  Xcw  ^'o^k. 


them  with  attention  and  effort,  we  scarcely  see  above 
the  white  spots,  truly  Zurbaranesque,  of  the  monastic 
habits,  the  holy  figures  of  the  charitable  Father  Martin 
de  Viscaya  who,  as  customary,  gave  bread  to  the  poor; 
Father  Carrion  who,  notified  of  his  immediate  death, 
awaits  it  upon  his  knees  in  the  dark  choir,  tranquil  in  his 
emotion,  surrounded  by  the  other  friars  of  whom  he  has 
just  taken  leave;  Father  Pedro  de  Salamanca — the  last 
— accompanied  by  another  monk  stands  before  a raging 
fire  which  he  succeeds  in  stopping  by  his  heartfelt  appeals 
and  eloquent  prayers. 

“Does  the  kind  reader  remember  the  benevolent  out- 
lines of  Father  Yanez  de  Figueroa,  the  founder  of  the 
community  of  St.  Jerome  of  Guadalupe;  the  very  severe 
exacting  prior  who  contributed  by  his  own  manual  labor 
and  that  of  his  monks,  to  the  great  works  of  the  cloister 
and  church;  the  energetic  reformer  of  usages;  the  devout 
priest  who  rivalled  the  Virgin  as  to  who  would  tire  first, 
she  in  bringing  riches  to  the  sanctuary,  or  he  in  making  an 
immediate  and  pious  use  of  them*?  Zurbaran  has  skill- 
fully conceived  it  in  the  painting  in  which  Father  Yanez 
de  Figueroa  figures,  although  seemingly  submitting  yet 
refusing  the  episcopal  mitre  which  the  king  of  Castile  is 
placing  upon  his  head.  A knight  of  Santiago  accompa- 
nies the  king  and  I would  take  this  picture  to  be  a portrait 
of  Zurbaran,  perhaps  prematurely  grey,  about  forty  years 
of  age,  if  I did  not  fear  to  be  too  rash,  as  the  lineaments 
of  the  master  are  completely  unknown  to  us.  The  per- 
sonal pride  of  Rembrandt,  his  character  of  concentrated 
dignity,  led  him  to  repeat  innumerable  times  his  own 
features,  often  dressed  in  varied  and  even  grotesque  garb, 
luxurious  attire  or  fantastic  trappings,  such  as  turbans. 


87 


plumes,  etc.  The  Extremadurian  painter  was  all  modest 
humility.  We  have  just  learned  that  the  canvas  in  the 
ducal  Museum  of  Brunswick,  always  considered  a work 
of  Espanoleto  (1639),  is  his  own  portrait. 

There  may  be  some  who  will  see  in  those  two  works  the 
same  head,  at  a different  age,  and  decidedly  distinct  from 
that  which  the  drawing  in  red  pencil  by  Standish  shows 
us,  and  which  is  also  very  much  younger.  Without  en- 
larging this  argument,  it  seems  quite  possible  that  in  a 
series  of  works  such  as  those  at  Guadalupe,  for  which  so 
many  friars  of  the  convent  became  living  models  for 
monks  of  other  ages  there  represented,  the  pious,  the 
admired  and  cherished  master  might  have  yielded  to  the 
natural  wish  of  the  Fathers  to  leave  upon  one  of  his  paint- 
ings, with  his  signature  ( 1639) , his  own  portrait. 

“I  will  not  add  a word  as  to  the  custom,  general  among 
artists,  seldom  to  put  in  their  pictures  anyone  facing  the 
spectator,  except  themselves  when  painting  their  own 
portrait,  and  this  as  a consequence  of  the  fact  that  they 
work  by  means  of  a mirror;  as  might  have  been  done  in 
the  case  of  the  supposed  knight  of  Santiago,  in  the  picture 
of  Father  Yahez. 

“This  picture,  as  well  as  another  one,  inferior  and  least 
in  merit  among  all  the  eight  monastic  legends — that 
which  represents  the  demon  taking  the  form  of  a boar,  a 
lion  or  a young  girl  to  disturb  the  prayers  of  Father 
Orgaz — either  because  one  is  first,  and  the  other  last  on 
the  wall,  and  consequently  both  in  the  corners,  above  the 
five  others  which  appear  on  the  well  lighted  wall,  or  in 
order  to  enhance  the  perfection  and  greater  importance 
of  the  three  which  they  enclose,  have  been  painted  in 
most  obscure  tones.  This  is  particularly  true  of  that  of 


88 


ST.  CWSILDA 

Aluseum  of  the  Prado,  Afadrid. 


i 


V 


'I 


1 


Father  Orgaz,  which  being  in  the  entrance,  immediately 
by  the  door,  was  not  intended  to  arrest  the  attention  of 
the  observer  or  the  curious  visitor,  who  might  not  have 
noticed  the  canvases  one  by  one,  nor  read  their  respective 
inscriptions.  This  picture  is  so  obscure,  that  if  it  were 
not  for  the  typical  white  of  the  habits,  all  might  be 
convinced  it  was  the  work  of  some  unknown  collabo- 
rator of  Zurbaran,  instead  of  being  the  real  work  of  his 
hand. 

“To  this  supposed  collaborator,  faithful  to  the  teach- 
ings of  the  master,  but  not  in  that  which  is  most  subtle 
(the  secrets  of  light  and  shade  in  the  distinct  colors  of  the 
palette,  the  art  of  shadows  of  color)  might  be  attributed 
the  large  canvas  of  the  T emptations  of  St.  Jerome.,  and 
all  the  small  pictures  on  the  pedestal  of  the  founder’s 
altar.  The  picture  of  the  Temptations  is  also  very  dark. 
At  this,  one  need  not  be  surprised,  because  it  is  in  the 
light,  below  the  window  of  the  south  wall  of  the  chapel. 
In  front  of  it,  in  full  light  is  the  picture  of  The 
Whipping  and  in  it,  true  to  himself,  Zurbaran  excelled 
in  the  clarification  and  multiplication  of  tones  which 
make  the  canvas,  with  regard  to  its  technique,  the  most 
characteristic  of  his  palette,  and  unsurpassed  among  those 
he  gave  to  Guadalupe.  The  Whipping  is  precisely 
the  picture  which  the  guide-books  of  the  XIXth  century 
attributed  to  Ribera!  This  ridiculous  blunder  shows  the 
limited  knowledge  of  artistic  things  which  inspired  the 
writers  (not  small  in  number)  who  wrote  about  Guada- 
lupe. In  the  room  there  is,  indeed,  a picture  which,  al- 
though being  by  no  means  by  Ribera,  is  painted  in  the  art 
of  claro-obscuro  in  bronzed  tones,  characteristic  of  the 
best  known  Ribera  style  and  that  of  his  disciples  or  imi- 


89 


tators.  It  is  the  picture  called  the  Temptations^  a mix- 
ture of  Zurbaranesque  and  Riberesque  technique,  the  lat- 
ter predominating.  For  my  part,  despite  the  opinion  of 
other  authors,  I would  say  that  the  drawing  of  that  pic- 
ture, as  well  as  the  design,  may  be  by  the  hand  of  Zur- 
baran,  but  not  a single  brush-stroke  nor  the  coloring  is 
his.  In  my  estimation,  Zurbaran  either  could  not  have 
finished  the  series  of  eleven  great  paintings  (and  eight 
small  ones)  of  the  sacristy  and  its  chapel,  or  had  taken  a 
collaborator  of  a different  artistic  training  although  in- 
fluenced by  him  to  a certain  degree. 

“It  is  true  that  in  the  series  of  the  pictures  of  Cadiz, 
and  those  of  Jerez,  almost  contemporaneous  with  the 
works  in  Guadalupe,  some  paintings  exist,  as  those  of  the 
pedestal  (St.  Lawrence,  the  Baptist  and  the  four  Evan- 
gelists), whose  arrangement  of  shadows  is  so  obscure, 
darkened,  or  blackened,  that  one  might  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  Zurbaran  at  one  time  painted  in  his  own 
extremely  characteristic  manner  and,  at  others,  in  the 
darkened,  or  the  black  manner  (charbonnee) , if  the  phrase 
be  permitted.  Such  inconstancy  does  not  quite  agree 
with  the  extreme  seriousness  which  is  noticed  throughout 
the  work  of  Zurbaran,  and  this  is  the  reason — a reason  of 
psychological  order  and  moral  probability — which  leads 
me  to  suppose  that  Zurbaran  had  in  Guadalupe  a collab- 
orator, at  times  a zealous  imitator,  in  the  task  entrusted 
principally  or  exclusively  to  himself. 

“I  repeat,  that  in  the  year  1638  in  which  he  signed  his 
l)est  works,  those  of  the  Carthusian  monastery  of  Cadiz, 
the  foundations  of  the  sacristy  and  chapel  of  Guadalupe 
were  begun,  and  that  in  this  year  he  signed,  in  the  Extre- 
madurian  monastery,  one  of  his  great  canvases,  the  Mass 


90 


HERCULES  KILLTXG  THE  CRETAX  DUET, 
Aluseum  of  the  Erado,  Madrid. 


of  Father  Cabanuelas^  a fact  which  shows  that  the  prior, 
at  the  same  time  that  he  commenced  the  foundations, 
conceived  the  idea  of  the  decorations  with  their  legendary 
themes,  and  that  he  chose  and  sent  for  the  most  celebrated 
Andalusian  artist  of  the  epoch.  To  1639  belongs  the 
splendid  picture  of  Father  Calmer  on;  to  1639,  the  re- 
markable portrait  of  Father  Illescas;  to  1639  also,  the  no 
less  remarkable  picture  of  Father  Y dhez  in  which  I sup- 
pose his  own  portrait  to  be  seen;  to  1639  also  belong 
the  picture  of  the  Death  of  Father  Carrion  and  four  other 
paintings  of  greatest  beauty,  all  signed  in  the  same 
year,  that  is,  the  second  of  the  ten  years  consumed  in  the 
work.  After  this  we  find  no  dates,  nor  do  we  see  any 
signatures.  Without  signatures  (or  with  signatures  that 
are  now  invisible)  are  three  other  pictures,  certainly  of 
less  importance,  of  the  eight  Gaudalupean  legends. 
The  “Pearl”  and  the  Whipping  are  also  without  signa- 
ture; and  the  little  paintings  of  the  pedestal,  as  well  as 
the  large  one  of  the  Temptations^  I dare  to  attribute  to  a 
friendly  hand,  well  disciplined  by  the  lessons  of  Zur- 
baran. 

“These  dates  thus  analyzed  may  suggest  another  ver- 
sion: that  perhaps  Zurbaran  helped  the  prior  quite  at 
the  beginning  of  the  work;  that  he  probably  gave  the  idea 
and  the  design  of  the  archionic  and  decorative  arrange- 
ment, which  may  also  be  a plausible  hypothesis. 

“And  after  all  is  said,  there  are  letters  preserved  from 
Zurbaran  to  the  architect  Crescenci,  one  of  October  8th, 
1639,  signed  in  Seville,  where  his  wife  died  the  28th  of 
May,  so  we  have  many  reasons  to  conclude  that  he  did  not 
finish  in  Guadalupe,  nor  for  Guadalupe,  the  collection 
of  paintings  which  he  began  with  such  extreme  ardor  and 


91 


success  in  the  latter  months  of  1638  and  early  in  1639. 
His  collaborator  and  successor,  I repeat  my  conjecture, 
educated  in  another  technique,  although  influenced  by 
that  of  Zurbaran,  may  have  completed  them  or  done 
some  minor  works,  and  perhaps  painted  with  more  orig- 
inality the  Ribera-like  canvas  of  the  Temptations  of  St. 
Jerome. 

“And  who  then  is  the  author  of  the  picture  of  St.  Nich- 
olas., who  the  author  of  the  St.  Ildefonso  on  the  altars  of 
the  upper  choir,  supposed  to  be  by  Zurbaran,  as  is  the 
opinion  of  Ponz  and  Cean,  although  this  belief  is  not  so 
alive  in  the  traditions  of  the  place  today  as  formerly. 

“The  second  supposition  I ignore  completely  and  pro- 
foundly; but  I would  be  convicted  of  incapacity,  as  a 
critic,  if  it  could  be  proved  that  one  or  the  other  were 
really  by  Zurbaran:  they  are  neither  by  him,  nor  in  his 
style,  nor  of  his  school.  From  the  hand  of  another  artist, 
or  perhaps  that  of  the  Temptations.,  is  the  St.  Ildefonso; 
by  a painter  entirely  free  from  any  intention  to  imitate 
either  the  technique,  or  the  manner,  or  the  drawing  and 
coloring  of  Zurbaran.  He  appears  to  me  as  a distant  dis- 
ciple, an  unknown  artist  of  the  Italian  traditions  of  Card- 
ucho  and  Caxes,  of  those  painters  of  Philip  Ill’s  time,  but 
a follower  inclined  to  a saner  realism.  I think  that  the 
St.  Nicholas  is  by  Antonio  Pereda.  Can  it  be  that  the 
St.  Ildefonso  is  by  the  same^?  or  by  Felix  Gastello,  or  bet- 
ter still  by  Bartolome  Roman,  of  whom  so  little  is  known 
(though  his  modest  life  was  not  short)  The  latter  we 
judge  collaborated  with  Zurbaran,  to  whose  generation 
he  precisely  belongs,  in  the  paintings  that  decorate  the 
chapel  of  San  Diego  de  Alcala,  of  Henares  (now  in  San 


92 


KIU,iX(;  THl'  m’DRA  OF  U-.RXA 
Alus'-um  of  the  Ri-adn.  AladrirF 


I 

1 


Francisco  the  Grand).  Difficult  would  be  the  proof  of 
an  hypothesis  so  intricate.” 

D.  M.  Rodriguez  Codola,  quoted  in  eulogy  by  Sr. 
Tormo,^®  has  written  the  following  lines  about  Zur- 
baran,  in  a fortnightly  review  called  “The  Architecture, 
Engineering  and  Construction  of  Barcelona.” : 

“I  will  limit  my  study  to  three  points : the  technique  of 
the  artist,  his  conception  of  monastic  life  and  mystical 
fervors,  and  the  place  he  occupied  among  the  masters  in 

the  golden  age  of  our  painting. 

• •••••••» 

“One  of  the  questions  that  emerge  when  we  wish  to 
speak  of  the  mechanism  of  the  celebrated  artist,  is  the  re- 
semblance between  the  first  works  of  Velasquez  and 
his  own.  It  is  interesting  to  keep  in  mind  the  coincidence 
of  manner  in  which  the  two  painters  began  to  form  their 
style,  and  from  which  we  gain  valuable  information- 
Both  had  masters  who  held  distinct  conceptions  of  art, 
Pacheco  and  Roelas,‘^“  who  bear  no  analogy  to  each  other, 
nor  to  Herrera  the  elder,  the  irascible  artist  with  whom 
Velasquez  studied  for  some  months, — both  Zurbaran  and 
Velasquez,  I repeat,  were  subject  to  equal  discipline. 
Each  one,  from  the  beginning,  confided  in  nature,  and  in 
the  conscientious  study  of  the  same  built  the  foundation 
upon  which  all  their  subsequent  work  was  to  be  erected. 
But  if  the  point  of  departure  is  identical  to  the  extent  that 
some  of  their  early  productions  have  caused  doubts  as 
to  whom  they  might  be  attributed,  the  road  followed  aft- 
erwards is  not  the  same.  Velasquez  arrived  at  the  un- 
folding of  his  artistic  personality  through  the  progress  of 
his  technique  which,  as  is  well  known,  makes  him,  jointly 


93 


with  El  Greco,  the  precursor  of  impressionism.  The 
analytical  manner  of  his  first  period  is  changed  into  an 
admirable  synthesis,  the  logical  consequence  of  the  way 
he  had  adopted  from  the  first.  Furthermore,  as  he  was 
progressing,  our  painter  to  Philip  IV  was  also  refining  his 
vision  and  keeping  the  rich  tones  of  his  palette  within 
sombre  harmonies. 

“Zurbaran  began  likewise  to  analyze,  being  exacting 
with  himself,  and  the  habit  of  reasoning  about  what  he 
painted  remained,  throughout  his  life,  so  strongly  in  him, 
that  it  has  to  account  for  the  fact  that  he  very  seldom  suc- 
ceeded in  embracing  the  totality  of  his  compositions,  in 
which  we  see  fragmentary  construction  rather  than  the 
aim  of  giving  an  impression  of  unity;  despite  the  opinion 
of  others,  we  know  that  the  Extremadurian  artist  was  not 
a colorist.  The  Sf.  Inez  attributed  to  him  is  an  exquisite 
work  of  harmony,  but  I cannot  believe  it  to  be  from  his 
hand.  It  does  not  correspond  to  any  of  his  other  paint- 
ings, not  even  to  those  of  similar  subjects,  as  the  St. 
Casilda  of  the  Prado  Museum,  the  St.  Barbara.,  St.  Inez., 
St.  Catherine  and  St.  Engracia  of  the  Hospital  of  the 
Blood  of  Seville. 

“It  is  easy  to  understand  that  Zurbaran  neither  felt  nor 
gave  great  importance  to  color.  As  proofs,  there  are  the 
Glorification  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas.,  the  Conference  of 
St.  Bruno  with  Pope  Urban  //,  the  Blessed  Alonso  Rodri- 
guez and  the  Jubilee.  Dry  and  hard,  with  an  execution 
preoccupied  in  faithfully  reproducing  the  material  look 
of  things,  and  of  giving  intense  emotion  to  the  expression 
of  the  figures  when  the  psychological  moment  in  which 
they  appear  in  the  picture  requires  it,  the  painter  does  not 
succeed  in  rendering  an  aerial  perspective.  The  colors 


94 


ST.  CASITDA 

Collection  of  the  late  Sir  William  \’an  .Horne,  IMontreal,  Canada. 


ST.  JOHX  THE  It.M’TTST  IN  'FHE  DESERT 
Provincial  Museum  of  Cadiz. 


sing  on  occasions  with  great  perfection,  but  singly,  with- 
out reflecting  in  themselves  the  surroundings  and  without 
the  atmosphere  creating  a general  tone  of  harmonious 
unity. 

“This  gives  bitterness  to  many  of  his  canvases  and  de- 
prives the  eye  from  taking  pleasure  in  looking  at  them. 
Neither  the  blues,  nor  the  reds,  nor  the  earthy  yellows, 
almost  orange,  that  he  sometimes  uses  are  from  a palette 
which  could  realize  the  vision  of  chromatic  subtlety.  On 
the  other  hand,  in  the  whites,  the  artist  frequently  ob- 
tains singular  delicacies,  without  reaching  however  the 
variety  of  those  of  Domenico  Theotocopuli  and  Velas- 
quez. Zurbaran’s  whites  are  discernible  at  a glance, 
they  are  either  bluish  or  yellowish,  and  within  these  two 
tints  is  included  his  entire  knowledge  of  white.  In  the 
first  instance,  such  as  the  Virgin  of  the  Caves,  they  are 
crude  in  the  light  and  monotonous  in  the  shadows.  In 
the  other  case,  the  mercenary  friars,  of  the  Royal  Acad- 
emy of  San  Fernando  and  the  Apparition  of  St.  Peter 
Apostle  to  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  pictures  that  are  surely  the 
most  harmonious  of  the  Extremadurian’s  works,  the 
whites  have  a singular  delicacy,  to  which  there  is  some- 
times united  a great  flexibility  in  the  cloth  of  the  habits 
which  seem  to  move  with  the  action  of  the  figures  or  the 
vibration  of  the  air.  Such  is  the  effect  he  obtains  in  these 
paintings. 

“There  are,  notwithstanding,  others  where  the  habits 
of  the  monks  and  the  draperies  of  celestial  figures  have 
the  stiffness  of  cardboard.  From  this,  I wish  to  prove 
that  Zurbaran  never  arrived  either  in  technique,  or  in 
color,  at  the  power  and  perfection  attained  by  the  native 
masters  who  lived  in  his  epoch.  Fie  never  freed  himself 


95' 


entirely  from  the  style  of  his  beginnings  and  shows  it 
throughout  the  generality  of  his  productions.  We  have 
to  observe,  however,  that  in  various  works  executed  in 
the  last  years  of  his  life,®^  he  arrived  at  a delicacy  of 
touch  that  contrasts  with  the  somewhat  hard  and  firm 
manner  visible  in  the  early  ones,  which  are  also  poor  in 
coloring.  I think  of  particular  merit  the  picture  seen  in 
the  church  at  Jadraque,  which,  so  far  as  the  attitude  is 
concerned,  bears  a certain  resemblance  to  a canvas  by 
Alonso  Cano,  owned  by  the  Royal  Academy  of  San  Fer- 
nando, although  the  latter  figure  is  facing  the  spectator 
and  the  former  is  taken  in  profile. 

“Zurburan’s  palette  does  not  show  important  modifica- 
tions. The  earthy  and  warm  colors  he  uses  for  the  flesh 
are  most  natural,  and  the  hands  and  heads  of  his  worldly 
figures  are  generally  swarthy  or  even  bronzed.  He  sel- 
dom renders  the  true  relation  of  values.  He  who  was  so 
careful  in  rendering  the  bodily  form  of  the  subjects  he 
painted,  did  not  consider  light  as  an  important  factor  in 
establishing  planes  and  distances:  he  only  uses  it,  when 
he  thinks  it  convenient,  as  an  element  of  expression.  I 
also  wish  to  note  the  difference  of  coloring  existing  be- 
tween Ribera  and  Zurbaran,  although  some  critics,  on  the 
contrary,  find  points  of  contact  in  their  execution.  Both 
take  interest  in  the  plasticity  of  figures,  and  both  study 
nature  with  the  tenacity  of  the  artist  who  endeavors  to 
give  to  all  things  their  proper  atmosphere;  but  the  son  of 
Fuente  de  Cantos  does  not  produce  the  effect  in  relief, 
sometimes  wonderful,  which  is  one  of  Espanoleto' s tri- 
umphs. Forms  do  not  appear  in  his  canvases  in  the 
sculptural  manner,  and  with  the  perfect  knowledge  of 
anatomy  and  muscular  development  revealed  in  the  cap- 


o6 


ST.  FR.\XCIS  OF  PAULA 
Collection  of  Air  D.  J.  Alacdougall,  Seville. 


i 

I 


;i< 


1 


tivating  works  of  the  painter  of  D.  Pedro  Giron,  duke  of 
Osuna,  and  of  the  Count  of  Monterey,  viceroy  of  Naples. 
This  is  true  so  far  as  it  refers  to  the  vision  of  human  form. 
In  regard  to  the  method  of  the  painter  to  fix  upon  the 
canvas  the  image  of  the  real,  his  ability  to  realize  it  is 
very  inconsiderable.  Ribera,  in  most  instances,  treats 
all  equally,  often  detrimental  to  quality,  and  conse- 
quently to  the  nature  of  things,  whether  the  living 
body  or  the  inanimate,  his  pencilling  being  ample, 
broad,  powerful  and  never  careless.  Never  does  the 
elan,  the  dash  of  execution  suffer  a moment  of  doubt  or 
hesitation.  There  is  a warmth,  an  impulse  and  such  har- 
mony of  mechanism,  that  if  I may  be  permitted,  I would 
say  that  the  pictures  of  the  son  of  Jatiba  sprang  from  an 
imperative  command  of  a state  of  the  soul,  which  kept 
the  artist  at  a high  tension  during  the  time  he  was  work- 
ing. We  do  not  see  this  in  Zurbaran.  Besides  the  posi- 
tive difference  which  exists  between  his  various  works, 
there  is  in  quite  a number  of  them,  separately  treated, 
such  a lack  of  balance,  and  lack  of  resemblance,  that  it  is 
disconcerting.  Next  to  details  constructed  with  remark- 
able truth  and  exactness,  we  find  others  which  seem  to 
come  from  a hand  less  firm  and  a vision  almost  infantile. 
This  contradictory  dualism  harms  him  extremely. 
Where  he  generally  maintains  his  excellence  is  in  the 
rendering  of  draperies  or  cloths.  In  these  the  touch  is 
mostly  firm  and  the  folds  are  arranged  with  precision,  em- 
phasized especially  in  the  shadows.  The  pleating  is 
logical  and  very  natural,  yet  not  always  convincing. 
Underneath  the  habits,  human  life  rarely  pulsates.  We 
do  not  feel  it  hidden  under  the  cloth,  nor  do  we  realize 
that  a human  form  is  concealed  within.  These  works  are 


97 


a study  of  draperies  of  great  value,  if  we  consider  them 
separately,  as  an  admirable  and  picturesque  reproduction, 
but  the  painter  did  not  put  into  them — on  account  of 
having  used  the  manikin  excessively — anything  but  the 
wish  to  copy  things  minutely.  The  real  essence,  the  life, 
the  true  spirit,  was  reserved  by  him  for  the  expression 
in  the  eyes  of  saints,  of  ascetics  and  devotees  in  ecstasy, 
and  of  monks  lost  in  profound  meditations. 

“For  those  who  lived  in  the  cloister  with  an  unquiet 
soul;  for  those  who  gave  themselves  up  to  ineffable 
dreams ; for  those  who  hoped  for  the  great  beyond  prom- 
ised to  the  good;  for  the  mystic  whose  exaltation  leads 
him  to  a sacred  sacrifice;  for  the  ascetics  who  annihilate 
in  ecstasies  their  earthly  passions;  for  the  monks,  writers, 
philosophers,  theologians  who  worked  for  culture,  Zur- 
baran  kept  the  power  of  his  expressive  pencil.  In  their 
faces,  as  the  noblest  of  human  features,  he  concentrated 
life — contemplative,  intellectual  life — the  emotion  which 
overwhelms,  or  the  creative  force  which  culminates  in 
a state  of  mingled  joy  and  sweet  pain,  resulting  from 
the  mental  perturbation  that  causes  it. 

“In  this  respect,  the  Extremadurian  artist  deserved  the 
fame  which  he  enjoyed.  We  do  not  know  any  other  who 
surpassed  him,  among  the  painters  of  our  country  in  the 
mystical  and  religious  note,  for  the  series  of  expressive 
color  schemes  he  succeeded  in  evolving.  Ribalta  and 
Espinosa  alone  equal  him.  And  it  is  necessary  to  dis- 
tinguish in  what  this  peculiarity  of  Zurbaran  consists. 
Mystical  painters,  better  say  religious  ones,  have 
abounded  among  us.  It  is  sufficient  to  cast  a look  over 
Spain’s  history  of  Art  to  be  convinced  of  this.  But  it  is 
not  sufficient  to  inspire  oneself  by  bible  scenes  and  acts 


q8 


iiii-:  j!U;:ssi:i)  ]:xRi<;)ri-;  srz(’)X 

Provincial  iMuscuni  of  Seville. 


i 


\ 


/ 


\ 


i 


of  martyrdom  to  deserve  the  name  of  mystical  painter. 
There  have  been  few  here  or  in  other  countries.  Some- 
thing very  fundamental,  however,  exists  in  Zurbaran, 
since  his  clearly  defined  personality  always  remains  with 
an  unmistakable  seal  of  distinction. 

“It  is,  therefore,  important  to  prove  the  reason  for  the 
artist’s  merit,  not  deducing  it  from  his  technique  which 
we  have  already  studied,  but  seeking  it  in  another  quality 
which  can  be  demonstrated.  This  statement  does  not  in- 
tend to  deny  the  existence  of  other  Spanish  painters  who 
were  interested  and  inspired  by  mystical  subjects.  This 
would  have  been  impossible,  considering  the  favorable 
atmosphere  which  their  own  country  offered  them  at  that 
time.  King  Philip  III  could  not  understand  how  any- 
one could  sleep  tranquilly  after  having  committed  a mor- 
tal sin.  Undeniable  proofs  of  the  piety  of  his  ancestors 
are  recorded,  and  it  is  unnecessary  to  cite  other  worldly 
circumstances  which  formed  the  Spanish  soul  of  the  epoch. 
Either  war  or  the  cloister:  the  passion  for  adventure 
dominated  them  or  the  renunciation  of  the  world  was 
their  goal.  They  either  sought  death  in  daring  exploits 
or  awaited  it  while  voluntarily  punishing  the  flesh.  Thus 
it  was  in  those  days. 

“St.  Theresa  of  Jesus  said: 

“ ‘I  live  without  life  in  my  breast,  I hope  for  so  high  a 
life,  that  I am  dying  because  I cannot  die.’ 

“In  these  lines  is  crystallized  one  of  the  phases  of  our 
past  peculiarities.  The  tone  of  monastic  life  was  what 
Zurbaran  felt. 

“From  this  arises  the  gravity  of  his  figures  who  seem 
ready  to  exclaim : 


99 


“ ‘Come  death,  so  veiled 

That  I do  not  feel  thee  come! 

Because  the  pleasure  of  death 
Exceeds  the  joy  of  life.’ 

“This  accounts  for  the  eyes  moistened  by  inexplicable, 
subjective  sensations,  looking  vaguely,  or  boldly  piercing 
into  space.  Then,  as  has  been  said,  Zurbaran  did  not  put 
into  one  single  expressive  formula  the  intensity  of  the 
mystic  ardors  which  devour  the  saints  and  holy  ones  he 
painted,  but  thus  he  conceived  them,  humble,  simple,  in 
no  showy  attitude,  avoiding  all  false  ostentation,  as  those 
who  put  sincerity  before  affectation.  Delivered  from  all 
worldly  attractions,  these  beings  pray  or  meditate  heed- 
less of  the  spectator.  Free  from  the  materiality  of  the 
earth,  they  live  within  themselves,  to  attend  only  to  the 
salvation  of  their  souls. 

“Thus  are  the  saints  and  ascetics  of  Zurbaran.  Look  at 
Sf.  Peter  Nolasco  before  St.  Peter  Apostle  appearing  to 
him.,  and  you  will  join  him  in  a feeling  of  admiration  and 
respect;  see  St.  Francis  in  adoration  before  a crude  cross, 
his  looks  directed  to  heaven,  holding  a bare  skull  in  his 
left  hand  and  placing  the  right  on  his  breast  (a  book  of 
prayer  is  on  the  rock  against  which  he  leans)  and  notice 
the  piercing  look  which  the  pupil  of  his  lighted  eye  directs 
toward  immensity;  see  the  ineffable  emotion  which  over- 
whelms him.  See  St.  Bruno  and  you  will  understand  the 
saint  who  is  seeking  in  the  infinite  a felicity  for  which  he 
is  making  penance  on  earth;  look  at  the  Blessed  Suzon 
and  observe  the  suffering  on  his  pallid  countenance  which 
is  not  derived  from  the  pain  caused  by  the  incision  of  the 
bistoury  in  his  breast;  his  grief  is  of  another  sort,  it  is  due 
to  considering  how  small  his  suffering  is  compared  to  that 


100 


1111.  jrr.11,1-,1-,  ( )!•  ST.  1- K,\.\(  i.s 
I’rovincinl  Museum  nf  ( urli/. 


m’* . 

.'i; 

. V '• 


borne  by  his  Redeemer.  Look  at  the  Blessed  Alonso 
Rodriguez^  the  Jesuit  ascetic,  who  in  an  edifying  adora- 
tion, and  almost  fainting  feels  the  light  that  reaches  him 
from  the  heart  of  Jesus  and  Mary.  Look  at  St.  Francis 
in  the  picture  of  the  Jubilee  and  fix  your  attention  on  the 
seraphic  monk  who  appears  kneeling,  arms  extended,  his 
head  raised,  tears  in  his  eyes,  his  mouth  half-open, — and 
notice  the  melancholy  countenance,  the  forehead  corru- 
gated by  the  amazement  of  the  wonderful  event,  and  you 
will  understand  the  shock  to  the  saint,  surprised  by  the 
heavenly  apparition  and  the  miracle  of  the  thorns,  with 
which  he  tore  his  skin,  changed  into  roses — hoping  by  this 
to  merit  the  grace  of  the  Jubilee.  Finally  see  the  Monk 
at  Prayer^  in  the  London  Gallery,  and  marvel  at  the  un- 
equalled conception  of  that  work  in  which  all  the  senti- 
ment of  prayer  is  reflected  in  the  darkened  eyes,  and  in 
the  hands  which  closely  hold  a skull.  If  you  analyze 
with  care  this  figure  animated  by  great  disquiet  but  also 
indomitable  faith,  opposing  to  tortures  the  firmness  of  the 
convictions  which  inspire  him,  you  will  recognize  the 
monk  in  flight  from  carnal  perils,  trying  to  escape  the 
lurking  sin;  the  monk  in  constant  penitence,  stringing  one 
after  another  incessant  prayers  so  as  not  to  give  a second 
to  wandering  thoughts,  subjecting  his  strong  imagination 
to  the  severe  discipline  of  prayer.  It  is  the  grave  devotee 
of  voluntary  tenacity  who  places  his  ideals  in  God  and 
death,  in  death  to  reach  God,  and  in  God  to  obtain  the 
strength  which  he  needs  on  earth.  It  is  the  creature  who 
believes  in  a God  of  implacable  justice,  and  for  this  he 
lives  doing  penance,  in  fear,  ...  It  is  the  highest  point 
of  expression  which  the  artist  reached. 

“Within  the  richness  and  expressive  color  of  his  inter- 


101 


pretations  of  mystic  life,  we  do  not  find  those  hair-raising 
scenes  of  martyrdom  such  as  were  rendered  with  implac- 
able realism  by  the  Espanoleto.  He  has  not  the  point  of 
ferocity  noted  there,  and  if  the  sombre  is  sometimes  ap- 
parent, it  comes  much  more  from  the  spirit  that  animates 
the  body  submitted  to  voluntary  rigors,  than  from  the 
actual  nature  of  the  subjects  painted. 

“Yet  Zurburan  is  not  necessarily  reduced  to  being  a 
painter  of  saints  and  friars,  trying  to  isolate  himself  from 
all  that  is  earthly  and  material;  he  was  also  a painter  of 
holy  women  and  martyrs,  as  well  as  of  the  monks  who 
represented  wisdom  and  intellectuality  in  the  great 
monastic  centres. 

“A  very  singular  conception  is  that  of  the  holy  women 
he  pictured,  attired  in  a magnificence  quite  archaic.  Of 
demure  carriage,  strong  and  youthful,  beautiful  and 
haughty,  none  would  say  they  are  the  virgins  of  the 
legends,  but  rather  titled  ladies,  contemporaries  of  the 
artist.  If  they  had  not  the  attributes  of  the  saints,  you 
might  think,  when  seeing  the  pearls  and  jewels  they  dis- 
play, that  they  belonged  to  the  Court  of  Philip  III,  and 
that  far  from  being  images  of  women  who  were  canonized 
for  their  virtues,  they  are  portraits  of  worldly  realities,  of 
wealthy  dames  looking  fixedly  at  us  in  an  imposing  air  of 
nobility  and  attractiveness. 

“Concerning  his  intellectual  monks,  there  are  here  as 
prototypes  of  them,  a series  of  luminaries  of  the  Order 
who  are  called:  Father  Pedro  Machado^  Father  Fran- 
cisco Vjiimel.,  Father  J eronimo  Perez,  and  Father  Her- 
nando de  Santmgo.  He  represents  them  in  full  mental 
labor,  endeavoring  to  formulate  with  their  profound  in- 
siglit  ideas  which  are  in  nebulous  form  only  in  their 


102 


ST.  I'K.WCIS  OF  ,\SSIS1 
Collection  of  I).  cle  licruetc,  Mailrid. 


i 


minds;  or  meditating  upon  some  dogmatic  point  which 
obliges  them  to  lift  the  pen  in  reflection  before  recording 
in  script  its  definite  formula.  In  the  faces  of  these  men, 
in  their  hands,  there  is  extraordinary  life.  In  their  fore- 
heads and  eyes  appear  an  uncommon  intellectual  vigor. 
Their  hands  will  again  move  the  pen  quickly,  by  an  im- 
pulse to  fix  the  ideas  which  are  taking  form  as  these 
clever  humanists  ripen  them  in  their  minds. 

“Having  shown  that  Zurbaran  was  a mystical  painter, 
and  this  in  the  highest  degree,  I shall  discuss  what  is  the 
difference  which  separates  him  from  the  others  who  were 
also  mystic  painters.  I refer  to  Morales  and  El  Greco. 

“Morales  felt  the  piety  which  is  born  of  meditation 
upon  the  sorrows  of  divine  personalities.  The  Ecce 
Homo  of  compassionate  looks,  pardons  the  crimes  of 
which  he  has  been  the  victim,  suffering  silently  in  his 
body,  the  muscles  vibrant  and  tortured  by  physical  pain. 
The  Dolorosa^  her  eyes  filled  with  bitter  tears,  shows  an 
expression  of  imposing  grief.  Zurbaran  felt  the  mysti- 
cism which  enkindles  the  souls  of  those  who  give  them- 
selves up  to  contemplative  life,  of  those  who,  sheltered 
in  a cell  or  in  the  open  air,  surrounded  by  rocky  landscape 
where  some  shrub  lifts  its  foliage,  keep  their  eyes  upon 
the  sky  or  upon  celestial  spheres  peopled  by  angels.  It 
is  singular  that  the  disciple  of  the  religious  Roelas  knew 
how  to  depict  the  psychological  moment  when  the  human 
spirit  rises  above  the  earthly  plane,  and  yet  did  not  suc- 
ceed in  expressing  the  divine.  Impregnated  with  the 
pervading  naturalism  which  persisted  in  him,  he  never 
could,  owing  to  this  motive,  elevate  himself  to  greater 
heights,  but  sometimes,  freed  from  his  naturalism,  he 
succeeded  in  expressing  the  ecstasy  of  the  soul  which  in 


103 


supernatural  vision  rejoices  in  tormenting  itself.  On 
the  contrary,  El  Greco  gave  to  posterity  the  type  of  the 
secular  devotee  and  mystic;  those  Spanish  gentlemen 
of  the  period  of  Philip  II, — beings  of  mysterious  looks, 
of  austere  body,  of  bloodless  lips,  of  bilious  complexion, 
in  whom  we  find  examples  of  the  visionary  generation 
which  began  the  decay  of  our  country.  How  powerful 
must  have  been  the  influence  of  such  surroundings,  that 
it  dried  out  and  killed  on  the  palette  of  Theotocopuli  all 
its  Venetian  pomposity!” 

Mr.  Carlos  Justi,  author  of  the  well  known  work  Diego 
Velasquez  and  his  Epoch,  treats  of  the  Extremadurian 
artist  in  one  of  its  chapters  entitled  The  Comrades  and 
studies  him  with  much  acumen,  showing  the  slight  influ- 
ence the  supposed  lessons  from  Roelas  had  upon  him. 
He  says:  “In  the  period  when  the  old  disappears  and 

new  germs  come  to  light,  the  influence  of  comrades  or  in- 
timate friends  is  sometimes  more  important  than  that  of 
masters.  The  coincidence  of  dates  indicates  that  Velas- 
quez was  acquainted  with  many  men,  afterwards  famous, 
who  made  up  the  artistic  circles  of  the  epoch.  Indeed,  by 
a great  number  of  facts  it  is  almost  proved  that  Alonso 
Cano  and  Zurbaran  were  his  friends.  They  must  have 
known  each  other’s  relatives  and  visited  them.  This 
friendship  did  not  cease  even  after  the  former  had  left 
the  country.  Later,  Velasquez  remembered  the  friend- 
ships of  his  youth  and  continued  them  at  Court. 

“The  works  of  this  trio  show  a relationship  similar  to 
that  existing,  a century  before,  between  Giorgio,  Palma 
and  Titian.  A community  of  sentiment  in  youth  whose 
spirit  was  manifested  in  very  distinct  forms,  but  whose 
mutual  influence  is  difficult  to  determine. 


104 


ST.  ]\iA'riii:w 

I’ruviiuial  Museum  of  ( adiz. 


r 


- M 


" i 


iS-t 


I 


r<%j. 


'•3 


I 


“No  one  more  marked  or  more  homogeneous  repre- 
sented the  tendencies  of  Spanish  naturalism  of  this  time 
with  such  brilliancy  as  Francisco  de  Zurbaran,  scarcely 
a year  younger  than  our  painter.  . . . 

“He  owed  little  to  his  masters.  He  probably  had  been 
a pupil  of  the  religious  Roelas.  Nevertheless  there  is 
only  one  of  his  works  we  know  of  that  could  have 
made  an  impression  upon  the  future  painter  of 
clerics  and  monks.  His  manner  certainly  is  not  that  of 
Roelas. 

“From  the  first,  he  showed  that  he  was  of  another  time, 
of  another  kind  than  the  complicated  and  flexible  priest. 
As  in  all  those  of  the  new  generation,  and  perhaps  with 
more  force  than  in  any  other,  there  was  in  Zurbaran  an 
impress  of  unity.  His  works  reached  greatness  through 
their  individuality. 

“The  painters  of  the  XVIth  century  were  men  of 
encyclopedic,  literary  and  technical  knowledge ; they 
knew  the  history  of  their  art  and  of  the  Catholic  religion ; 
they  were  scholars,  devotees  and  poets.  Those  who  were 
of  the  stuff  of  Zurbaran,  were  nothing  but  painters  who 
did  not  leave  the  studio,  who  did  not  deal  with  living  or 
dead  comrades,  and  in  general,  all  the  immense  realm  of 
art  did  not  interest  them,  except  the  region  they  had 
selected.  . . . 

“The  talent  of  Zurbaran  matured  early  and  at  the  age 
of  twenty  he  already  enjoyed  such  a reputation  that  the 
Marquis  of  Malagon  entrusted  him  with  the  ornamenta- 
tion of  the  great  high  altar  of  the  chapel  of  St.  Peter  in 
the  cathedral,  finished  and  signed  in  162^. 

“To  this  same  period  is  assigned  his  principal  work,  the 


10^ 


Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  for  the  college  of  this 
name. 

“His  style,  which  we  know,  is  here  completely  formed. 
Upon  a clear  background  the  figures  stand  out  for  the 
greater  part  in  fluid  colors  of  discrete  blending,  record- 
ing in  their  tones  the  influence  of  the  work-room.  His 
shadows,  extinguished  by  reflected  light  well  distributed, 
lack  vigor;  and  on  the  contrary,  the  illuminated  spaces 
are  spangled  with  brilliant  points  and  spots  of  sparkling 
white.  His  architecture  is  spacious,  with  the  serious 
sobriety  of  the  renaissance,  with  perspectives  of  sunny 
landscapes,  streets  and  courts;  the  vistas  are  ample,  with 
distant  points  of  view,  small  hills  and  arid  deserts. 

“The  high  altar  of  the  chapel  of  St.  Peter,  painted  per- 
haps under  the  eyes  of  Velasquez,  was  arranged  accord- 
ing to  the  models  of  the  Middle  Ages.  In  the  centre,  the 
Prince  of  the  Apostles  is  represented,  of  colossal  size,  as 
on  a throne  and  with  the  tiara.  In  the  space  between  the 
arches,  he  is  kneeling  in  the  point  of  the  angle  which  the  ' 
Apostles  form,  as  in  some  of  Raphael’s  works,  but  the 
figures  are  dry  and  trivial.  It  is  remarkable  how  the 
artist  dealt  with  ideal  figures.  His  Mary  is  an  amiable 
and  timid  young  girl,  the  most  beautiful  of  the  valley, 
the  Queen  of  May  elected  in  sacrifice  as  the  Holy  Virgin 
and  displaying  above  her  seductive  golden  hair  the  crown 
of  Heaven.  His  Creator  is  a ponderous  old  man,  with 
upraised  face,  wavy  white  hair  and  beard,  who  throws  his 
sombre  look  upon  the  world.  Thus  the  Genius  of  the 
Mountains  is  often  represented,  buried  under  the  per- 
petual snows  of  the  Alps!  In  contrast  to  the  strong  and 
solitary  autocrat  of  Mosaism  or  Islamism,  the  Spaniards 
paint  the  Creator  more  as  a Saturn,  on  whose  ill-humored 


106 


and  aged  face  we  see  reflected  the  constant  solicitude 
which  the  mad  world  corrupted  by  the  devil  causes  him, 
as  well  as  the  government  of  the  celestial  Court  with  its 
numerous  and  pressing  supplications. 

“At  this  time  Zurbaran  and  Velasquez  resembled  each 
other  in  their  style,  more  than  afterwards.  The  Extre- 
madurian  was  particularly  gifted  as  to  individuality,  and 
not  inferior  to  him  in  this  respect  was  the  Sevillian. 

“The  history  of  Sf.  Bonaventura  alone,  and  in  particu- 
lar the  two  canvases  of  the  Louvre,  contain  a sufficient 
number  of  important  heads  to  fill  half  the  lifetime  of  a 
portrait  painter.  Besides  these  heads  all  the  rest  seems 
vague  and  conventional.  The  contempt  for  fantasy  was 
in  him  even  more  marked  than  in  Velasquez,  the  subjec- 
tion to  the  model,  his  honorable  and  vigorous  realism. 
He  knew  how  to  portray  each  countenance,  line  by  line ; 
each  figure  held  its  proper  place  and  each  garment  hung 
carefully  upon  the  body.  There  was  no  heaviness,  but 
a rule  perfectly  individual.  Moreover,  he  was  an  artist 
who  carved  the  whole  wood,  who  drew  and  modelled  in 
grand  style. 

“But  he  did  not  paint  any  scene  of  common  life,  and 
scarcely  left  a portrait.  Things  of  the  world  tired  him, 
and,  like  his  saints,  he  lived  in  a holy  seclusion.  On  the 
contrary,  Velasquez  was  much  more  familiar  with  the 
psychology  of  his  creations,  so  that  he  seemed  to  give 
them  life.  It  is  very  certain  that  he  handled  the  paint- 
ing of  his  models  according  to  their  special  and  personal 
significance,  and  not  as  representatives  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical humbug. 

“Thus  these  two  artists  soon  took  two  very  distinct 
paths. 


107 


“The  Sevillian  burned  with  the  desire  to  abandon  the 
obscurity  of  churches  and  convents,  and  to  go  out  into  the 
dazzling  light  of  the  Court.  To  Zurbaran,  Seville  ap- 
peared too  lively.  He  enjoyed  taking  his  easel  to  the 
monasteries,  such  as  Guadalupe,  the  rocky  nest  of  Ex- 
tremadura, where  he  found  himself  in  his  element. 

“Consequently,  Velasquez  quickly  changed  his  style, 
while  Zurbaran  kept  his  first  manner  almost  to  the  end.®^ 

“He  was  of  a more  unyielding  quality  than  all  the 
others,  and  possessed  the  rigid  fanaticism  of  principles 
common  to  Romanists.” 

After  the  opinions  quoted,  there  are  two  others  which 
also  are  worthy  to  be  mentioned  here. 

First  we  have  that  of  D.  Henry  Romero  de  Torres 
about  the  paintings  of  the  Museum  of  Cadiz,  then  the 
article  written  by  D.  Joseph  Ramon  Melida  who  studied 
on  the  spot,  as  did  Sr.  Tormo,  the  pictures  of  the  Guada- 
lupe Monastery. 

Sr.  Romero  de  Torres  says  that  “the  eighteen  pictures 
which  are  preserved  in  this  gallery  mark  two  epochs  in 
the  artist’s  life  and  should  be  divided  into  two  groups. 
Corresponding  to  the  first  one  are  the  works  entitled  St. 
Luke,  St.  John  the  Lvangelist,  St.  John  Baptist,  St.  Law- 
rence, St.  Mark,  and  St.  Matthew,  designated  by  the 
numbers  8o,  77,  66,  67,  79  and  78  of  the  catalogue. 

“These  pictures  are  inferior  to  the  other  paintings; 
there  are  some  indecisions,  a carelessness  of  drawing,  a 
lack  of  harmony  and  brilliancy  of  shading  in  some  of 
them;  and  in  comparing  them  with  their  companions,  one 
miglit  doubt  they  were  by  Zurbaran. 

“In  my  opinion,  they  belong  to  his  first  period,  when  he 


108 


« 


1 


began  to  be  known  in  Seville  and  his  style  was  not  com- 
pletely formed.  ... 

“The  second  group  is  composed  of  the  twelve  following 
pictures:  SL  Bruno  at  Prayer^  the  Jubilee^  the  Pente- 
cost^ St.  Ugon  Bishop  of  Lincoln^  a Carthusian  Cardinal.. 
St.  Thelmo,  St.  Ugon  Bishop  of  Grenoble^  a Holy  Car- 
thusian., a Holy  Martyr  of  the  Order.,  the  Cardinal  Nich- 
olas, an  Angel  with  a Censer  and  another  like  it. 

“All  these  artistic  gems  correspond  to  the  period  of  the 
artist’s  greatest  flowering,  very  especially  the  last  nine, 
painted  upon  wood.  The  figures  are  of  conventional 
size.  It  can  be  said  that  these  are  perhaps  the  best  that 
the  fecund  pencil  of  Zurbaran  has  produced. 

“In  looking  at  them,  one  admires  the  great  originality 
of  the  painter  most  typically  Spanish  of  his  age:  sober, 
austere,  vigorous,  influenced  by  an  imperative  natural- 
ism which  he  unites  to  an  expression  profoundly  religious 
and  spiritual.  Marvelous  at  the  same  time  is  his  synthet- 
ical and  personal  manner  of  perceiving  the  effects  of 
claro-obscuro  in  great  masses,  and  his  splendid  and  bril- 
liant coloring  which  rivals  that  of  the  great  Venetian 
masters.” 

The  illustrious  Melida  expresses  himself  in  these  terms 
in  his  article  called  “Art.  The  Monastery  of  Guada- 
lupe” which  appeared  in  the  Courrier  of  Madrid  {PI 
Correo)  the  nth  of  March,  1908: 

“There  are  eight  of  his  best  works  in  the  sacristy  of 
Guadalupe,  where  perhaps  the  great  and  powerful  genius 
of  the  sovereign  contemporary  of  Velasquez  most  bril- 
liantly shines.  We  will  not  stop  to  describe  his  can- 
vases which  represent,  not  passages  from  the  life  of  St. 


109 


Jerome,  as  they  were  wrongly  called,  but  subjects  much 
more  familiar  to  the  monks  of  Guadalupe,  that  is,  inci- 
dents and  miracles  ascribed  to  the  venerable  members  of 
the  Order.  These  topics  were  certainly  very  appropriate 
to  the  artistic  temperament  of  Zurbaran,  who,  as  Justi 
says,  distinguished  himself  by  the  merit  of  treating  with 
a realism  we  might  call  photographic,  peculiar  indeed 
to  Spanish  art,  subjects  which  would  have  exhausted  the 
imagination  of  other  painters. 

“Besides,  the  figures  in  them  are  monks  and  it  was  Zur- 
baran’s  specialty  to  depict  them.  With  such  appropri- 
ate material  this  artist,  in  Guadalupe,  realized  in  each 
canvas  a marvellous  creation.  These  admirable  figures 
fascinate  by  the  truth,  the  character  and  the  life  the 
painter  put  into  them,  concentrated  in  the  faces.  The 
cloths  of  the  habits  were  treated  with  even  more  realism. 
The  backgrounds,  quiet  and  harmonious,  olfer  some  effect 
of  light,  a glimpse  of  landscape  or  some  accessories  that 
bring  out  the  energy  of  the  silhouettes  of  those  classic 
Spanish  friars.  One  of  them.  Father  Illescas,  looks  at 
us  with  a severe  and  penetrating  glance. 

“But  the  merit  of  these  canvases  is  not  alone  in  the  de- 
tails which  the  painter  may  have  elaborated  to  satisfy  his 
realistic  tendency;  it  is  in  the  fact  that  with  the  few  ele- 
ments and  scarce  resources  these  subjects,  in  their  ideal 
aspect,  lent  him,  the  artist  knew  how  to  master  with  se- 
renity and  exactness  the  art  of  great  painting,  treating 
reality  in  a broad  and  sober  manner;  this  merit,  also,  lies 
in  the  powerful,  easy  and  pure  technique,  transparent  at 
times  as  an  aquarelle,  with  clear  and  silvery  tones,  lumi- 
nous in  the  fragments  of  the  background,  ardent  in  the 
heads  and  other  details. 


1 10 


“In  fact,  these  canvases  which  connect  the  glorious 
traditions  of  the  Italian  school  with  the  decided  realistic 
tendencies  of  Spanish  art,  constitute  an  element  most  in- 
dispensable for  appreciating  that  evolution,  and  the  con- 
siderable contribution  of  Zurbaran  to  it.  In  the  present 
chapel,  at  the  back  of  the  sacristy,  in  the  golden  reredos, 
are  also  paintings  by  him;  some  precious  small  figures  of 
monks,  on  the  pedestal,  and  in  the  upper  part  a painting 
representing  St.  Jerome  among  angels,  in  a sky  suffused 
with  transparent  light.  In  the  same  chapel,  there  are 
two  other  large  pictures  reproducing  incidents  of  the 
Saint’s  life.  That  which  represents  the  T efnptations  in 
Syria  reveals  the  hand  of  Zurbaran;  the  other  one,  in 
which  the  angels  whip  him,  I hold  to  be  by  Ribera.” 

The  irrefutable  competence  of  our  distinguished  di- 
rector of  the  National  Museum  of  Painting  and  Sculp- 
ture, D.  Jose  Villegas  y Cordero,  being  well  known,  as  a 
critic  of  art,  I ventured  to  ask  his  opinion  in  regard  to 
Zurbaran,  and  he  had  the  goodness  to  send  me  the  follow- 
ing lines:  “Zurbaran  is  the  greatest  portrait  painter, 

and  the  most  faithful  interpreter  of  the  spirit  and  life  of 
those  soldiers  of  the  Church  who  highly  distinguished 
themselves  in  his  epoch.  His  monks  are  not  the  obscure 
sectaries  of  the  growing  Church  who  hid  themselves  in 
caves  and  came  out  (often,  as  confessors  of  the  new 
faith)  to  stain  with  their  blood  the  arena  of  the  Circus 
Maximus. 

“H  is  monks  of  strong  features,  whose  blood  seems  to 
have  ceased  to  flow  in  their  arteries,  show  an  unalterable 
calm:  they  certainly  never  laughed  nor  cried,  nor  had 
the  temperament  of  Pope  Julius  II,  or  Cardinal  Vitel- 
eschi. 


“When  looking  at  the  figures  in  the  picture  of  SL 
Bruno  before  Urban  //,  one  observes  that  their  characters 
do  not  exactly  reveal  obedience.  Their  expression  shows 
the  energy  of  those  who  are  used  to  command,  and  in 
their  looks  one  does  not  discover  the  spiritual  and  doleful 
reflection  which  humility  gives  to  the  dreamers  of  the  Re- 
demption. They  are  men  who  could  breathe  the  free  and 
balmy  air  of  the  cloister,  but  not  the  confined  atmos- 
phere of  the  catacombs.  . . . 

“One  of  the  characteristics  which  most  distinguishes  him 
is  the  austere  ascetism  of  his  monks,  whose  portraits  im- 
press us  so  profoundly  that  they  convey  the  sensation  the 
artist  must  have  felt  when  painting  them.  As  a tech- 
nician, Zurbaran  shows  a vivid  personality;  his  drawing 
and  color  are  of  perfect  correctness.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  is  nothing  genial  in  him,  but  his  work  is  much  more 
the  result  of  a constant  study  and  a great  spirit  of  ob- 
servation. Contrary  to  what  some  critics  have  said,  Zur- 
baran’s  palette  has  no  resemblance  whatever  to  that  of 
Caravaggio.  If  there  appears  to  be  any  point  of  contact 
in  the  obscure  tones  with  those  of  the  Italian  painter,  it 
is  to  be  attributed  to  the  changes  or  alterations  of  the  col- 
ors, rather  than  to  original  likeness.  It  is  sufficient 
to  look  at  some  paintings  in  which  the  colors  have  been 
preserved  to  notice  that  these  are  more  diaphanous  and 
the  darker  ones  less  heavy  than  in  his  other  productions.” 

As  a finish  to  the  opinions  just  given,  and  as  the  best 
sketch  made  of  Zurbaran,  it  is  interesting  to  know  the  one 
that  D,  Francisco  Alcantara  published  in  an  article  in  the 
El  hnparcial,  of  May  I2,  1905,  the  year  of  the  Exposi- 
tion : 

“Neither  the  searchers  for  dates  who  perform  useful 


1 12 


IMMACULATK  ('( )XCK1'TK  )X 
Aluseum  of  liuda-Pest. 


'"'I 


and  meritorious  work,  nor  the  critics  who  with  too  much 
frequency  do  no  more  than  circle  round  about  true  facts, 
have  yet  explained  to  us  the  personality  of  the  Extre- 
madurian  painter. 

“Where  are  the  authentic  documents  capable  of  ex- 
plaining it“?  They  are  in  his  country,  in  Extremadura. 
As  the  flavor  of  fruits  of  the  same  class  differs  from  an- 
other on  account  of  the  soil  which  may  produce  it,  so  is 
man,  of  his  soil,  and  above  all,  in  epochs  like  that  of  Zur- 
baran.  The  robust  strength  of  the  Spanish  nation  was 
the  fruit  of  a magic  tree ; and  if  to  this  we  add  the  definite 
personality  and  the  temperament  particular  to  each  re- 
gion of  the  peninsula,  then  we  will  understand  why  it  is 
that  in  Extremadura,  where  Zurbaran  was  born  and 
brought  up,  we  must  seek  the  fount  of  his  temperament. 
In  the  Extremadura  of  the  XIVth  and  XVth  centuries 
are  those  causes  to  be  found ! 

“With  their  minds  enchained  by  religious  sentiment, 
their  intelligence  identified  with  unchangeable  dogma- 
tism, the  Extremadurians,  more  than  any  other  natives  of 
Spain,  were  at  that  time  a tremendous  force  for  action. 
In  no  country  is  one  more  attached  to  the  soil  than  in 
Extremadura,  taking  part  in  an  intimate  manner  in  the 
fresh  vigor  of  the  earth,  where  all  that  is  produced,  even 
woman,  is  masculine, — excuse  the  phrase  for  its  grace  of 
brevity.  Not  even  in  Aragon  do  they  reach  the  limit 
seen  in  Extremadura.  This  virile  sap  which  is  guarded 
from  generation  to  generation,  awaiting  something  that 
will  stir  it,  was  then  running  impetuously  through  the 
channels  of  history,  and  Zurbaran  is  a Pizarro  or  a Cortez 
to  whom  it  cost  much  more  work  and  fatigue  to  conquer 
his  America  than  for  them  to  conquer  theirs. 


113 


“Zurbaran,  coarse,  rude,  intrepid,  a strong  youth 
greatly  influenced  by  the  ascetism  of  Gothic  art  (and 
above  all  by  Morales) , with  heart  as  solid  as  a stone,  and 
warmed  by  the  mystical  fervors  of  his  birth-place  (so 
much  more  difficult  to  express,  as  the  Extremadurian 
temperament  is  incapable  of  romantic  feeling,  of  Muril- 
lian  idealism) , found  in  Roelas  all  the  resources  of  the 
great  art  of  Italy,  already  Spanicized  in  Seville,  the  en- 
chantment and  glory  of  the  world,  fountain  of  poetry, 
school  of  the  Castilian  tongue  and  cradle  of  Spanish  art. 

“Born,  I believe,  seventeen  or  eighteen  years  after  the 
death  of  the  mystic  and  bewitching  St.  Theresa,  who  in 
a certain  way  gave  a definite  national  character  to 
Spanish  religion,  Zurburan,  a fellow-countryman  of  San 
Pedro  de  Alcantara,  saw  in  his  youth  the  closing  of  the 
Council  of  Trent.  An  artist  born  in  a country  of  fervent 
devotees,  as  a result  of  the  intensity  of  his  mystic  ardors, 
he  was  so  coarse  and  severe  that  he  never  knew  the  touch 
of  delicate  tenderness.  Spaniard,  artist,  ascetic,  Extre- 
madurian, he  was  dogmatic  and  expressed  the  sombre  and 
terrible  beauty  of  voluntary  martyrdom  of  the  flesh,  in 
the  most  powerful  manner.  This  was  the  kingdom  con- 
quered by  the  painter ; but  his  conquest  was  the  work  of  an 
entire  life,  and  if  he  had  not  reached  the  age  in  which  he 
painted  the  Jubilee  of  the  Cadiz  Museum,  the  Blessed 
Rodriguez  of  the  Academy  of  San  Fernando,  the  Blessed 
Suzon  of  Seville,  the  St.  Francis  of  Assisi,  owned  by  Sr. 
Beruete,  the  Pentecost  of  the  Cadiz  Museum,  the  St.  An- 
thony of  the  Marquis  de  Casa  Torres,  and  above  all  the 
Carthusians,  superior  to  all  praise,  of  the  Cadiz  Museum, 
this  conqueror  would  not  have  fulfilled  his  task. 

“In  the  Carthusians,  when  he  arrived  at  old  age,  when 


114 


he  was  a child  again,  when  the  first  impressions  became 
freshened  in  his  memory,  the  remembrance  of  the  divine 
Morales  reappeared,  and  with  it,  the  distant  influences 
of  the  North,  preserved  with  such  true  love  in  the  most 
profound  regions  of  his  soul,  and  the  Italian  reminis- 
cences vanished.  . . . 

“This  is  the  Zurbaran  whom  I wish  to  be  known. 
Velasquez,  the  great  painter,  the  god  of  painters,  did  not 
climb  so  high  in  churchly  ideals.  Murillo  is  a dwarf. 
Oh,  severe,  coarse,  ardent  and  fierce  painter!  Through 
thee  we  know  the  height,  unapproachable  by  the  vulgar, 
where  Spaniards  arrived  in  their  mad  desire  for  the 
ideal  . . . !” 

In  regard  to  the  epoch,  the  ideas  and  tastes  which 
it  represents,  the  significance  of  his  personality  may  be 
summed  up  in  the  words  of  D.  Francisco  Alcantara: 
“Zurbaran  is  the  painter  of  the  Council  of  Trent.” 


115 


THE  PAINTER  IN  THE  LIGHT  OF  HIS  WORKS 


IF  it  is  always  difficult  to  follow  an  artist  step  by 
step,  through  the  periods  of  his  evolution;  in  the 
case  of  Zurbaran  it  is  almost  impossible. 

From  the  Immaculate  Child ^ belonging  to  Cepero,  done 
in  1616,  and  the  Child  Virgin  in  Prayer,  of  Beruete, 
somewhat  earlier,  to  the  grand  composition  of  the  reredos 
of  the  St.  Peter  chapel  in  the  Sevillian  cathedral,  finished 
in  1625,  there  is  an  abyss  without  any  transition.  After 
this  last  year  the  young  Extremadurian  is  already  a most 
accomplished  painter.  The  timid  drawing  and  lack  of 
power  in  the  colors,  and  the  candor  of  the  composition 
of  his  first  known  canvas,  as  well  as  the  simple  and  yet 
sublime  expression  of  the  second,  is  succeeded  in  those 
of  the  reredos,  which  seem  to  follow  them,  by  a strength 
of  touch  and  a complete  mastery  of  the  problems  of  color. 
His  manner  of  composition  so  well  thought  out,  and  at 
the  same  time  so  natural  leads  us  to  presume  that  be- 
tween these  two  periods  the  artist  must  have  painted 
many  canvases,  either  in  the  studio  of  Villanueva,  or  of 
some  other  Sevillian  teacher,  until  in  the  pictures  of  the 
life  of  St.  Peter  he  showed  a style  completely  formed.. 
To  the  fame  of  these  works  may  be  ascribed  the  many 
commissions  which  from  that  time  he  executed  for  nearly 
all  the  churches  and  monasteries  of  that  city. 

The  reader  already  knows  the  study  which  Sr.  Tormo 
has  made  of  the  Immaculate  of  Cepero.  The  Child  Vir- 


( iiKis  i Ki-.i’LAcixi;  ms  \ i,s  irKi,  .\i- ri-K  i- i.ac.i.u.a  i mx 

( lmr(  h of  St,  John  llic  Uaptist.  Jailrai|nr. 


\ 


k-  y 


V 


lei 

f 


y 


Sv 


‘r: 


--r- 


/ 


I 


t- 


I 


gin  in  Prayer  is  a more  perfect  work.  There  is  not  that 
indecision  which  characterises  the  other.  The  colors  are 
more  studied  and  the  draperies  reveal  some  of  the  perfec- 
tion which  Zurbaran  was  to  attain  later  in  his  art. 

The  curtains  that  form  the  canopy  over  the  head  of  the 
Virgin,  her  skirt  and  waist,  and  the  linen  cloth  which  is 
seen  in  the  sewing  basket  are  as  well  done  as  those  of  his 
best  period.  Apparently  the  Virgin  is  seven  or  eight 
years  old.  She  faces  the  spectator  seated  upon  a cushion 
or  low  taboret  which  is  not  visible,  and  holds  in  her  lap  a 
small  sewing  cushion  upon  which  is  placed  her  work  and 
a ribbon  marker.  The  divine  Child  has  interrupted  her 
task  and,  hands  clasped,  keeps  an  attitude  of  prayer  di- 
recting her  beautiful  eyes  heavenward.  The  nimbus  is 
enclosed  within  a circle  of  angels’  heads.  To  the  right  of 
the  spectator,  one  sees  in  the  background  a pot  of  lilies, 
and  in  the  foreground  a willow  basket.  At  the  left  is  a 
small  table  upon  which  rest  a little  book  and  a pair  of 
scissors;  and  before  the  table,  on  the  floor,  there  is  a 
small  white  porcelain  jar.  After  the  paintings  of  the 
reredos  of  St.  Peter,  Zurbaran  executed,  among  other 
works  finished  in  1629,  the  following  pictures: 

The  Virgin  of  the  Caves ^ St.  Hugo  in  the  Refectory., 
the  Vision  of  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  the  Apparition  of  St. 
Peter  the  Apostle  to  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  the  Conference 
of  St.  Bruno  with  Pope  Urban  II,  St.  Bonaventure  vis- 
ited by  an  Angel  who  designates  hi?n  the  Cardinal  to  be 
elected  Pope,  St.  Bonaventura  visited  by  St.  Thomas  to 
whom  he  shows  the  Crucified  as  the  Origin  of  his  Knowl- 
edge, and  the  Child..  Jesus  wounding  his  Ringer  while 
weaving  a Crown  of  Thorns. 

We  shall  have  to  study  each  of  these  in  succession. 


117 


without  being  influenced  by  the  opinions  of  the  many 
critics  who  have  analyzed  them. 

The  Virgin  of  the  Caves  protecting  under  her  Mantle 
a Band  of  Monks  is  the  weakest  of  them  all,  both  in 
grouping  and  in  the  expression  of  the  figures.  Although 
the  robes  are  well  executed  we  cannot  say  as  much  for  the 
countenance  of  Our  Lady  (whose  mantle  is  held  up  by 
two  angels  and  assumes  the  form  of  a tent)  ; we  do  not 
see  in  her  that  expression  of  sweetness  and  piety  which 
should  suffuse  her  countenance,  and  the  groups  of  six 
Carthusians  kneeling  on  either  side  of  the  Mother  of  God 
appear  so  unmoved  that  far  from  seeming  to  be  in  the 
presence  of  a miracle  they  look  like  simple  models  for  a 
painter,  and  gaze  at  the  Virgin  with  the  calmness  they 
would  show  toward  any  mortal. 

St.  Hugo  in  the  Refectory  and  the  Miracle  of  the  Holy 
Vow  is  a composition  marked  by  realism  in  the  execution. 
Everyone  of  the  figures  represented  shows  the  attitude 
and  expression  appropriate  to  it.  The  faces  and  habits 
of  the  friars,  the  dishes  and  jars  which  are  scattered  over 
the  table  are  all  minutely  studied,  but  the  technique 
leaves  much  to  be  desired. 

The  Vision  of  St.  Peter  Nolasco  is  one  of  Zurbaran’s 
most  complete  works,  and  as  Sr.  Araujo  says,  “the  ex- 
pression and  color  are  admirable.”  Meanwhile  the 
Saint  kneeling  sleeps,  the  left  elbow  on  the  table,  the 
right  hand  touching  an  open  book;  an  angel  appears  to 
him  and  shows  him  in  a dream  the  celestial  city  of  Jeru- 
salem, which  is  visible  through  a beautiful  opening  of 
the  sky,  in  the  upper  corner  on  the  right  of  the  canvas, 
llie  physiognomy  of  the  sleeping  Saint  is  a study  of  the 
first  order.  The  angel  is  a little  rascal  of  the  sacristy,  a 


118 


rHE  SACRISTR^'  AND  CHARKL  OF  GUADALUPE 


t 


\ 


robust  acolyte  who  no  doubt  served  as  a model  to  the 
artist,  who  painted  him  without  modifying  in  the  least 
the  roguish  face  of  the  youth. 

The  Apparition  of  St.  Peter  the  Apostle  to  St.  Peter 
Nolasco  (signed  1629)  offers  an  interesting  example  of 
the  study  of  the  nude,  as  well  as  of  drapery  whose  inter- 
pretation has  been  recognized  as  one  of  Zurbaran’s  great- 
est merits,  in  the  opinion  of  his  critics. 

St.  Peter  the  Apostle  nailed  to  the  inverted  cross  ap- 
pears before  St.  Peter  Nolasco,  who,  kneeling  before  him, 
is  absorbed  in  contemplation.  The  folds  of  his  robe  fall 
in  a very  natural  way  without  complications  or  conven- 
tions of  any  kind : the  cloth  is  cloth  and  could  not  be  any- 
thing else.  The  body  of  the  Apostle  shows  that  the 
painter  had  an  extraordinary  knowledge  of  anatomy. 
The  composition  of  this  work  is  simple  and  yet  the  two 
figures  that  are  represented  in  it  could  not  have  been 
better  arranged. 

Even  superior  to  the  expression  in  this  picture  is  that 
of  the  Conference  of  St.  Bruno  with  Pope  Urban  II. 

The  attitude  of  the  two  principal  personages  seated 
face  to  face  is  exactly  appropriate  to  the  scene  they  repre- 
sent, and  the  relation  of  one  to  the  other  is  just  what  they 
would  assume  in  reality.  In  their  faces  there  is  none  of 
the  immobility  which  characterizes  those  of  the  monks 
in  the  Virgin  of  the  Caves.  While  the  Pontiff  shows  an 
arrogant  and  majestic  mien,  St.  Bruno  appears  humble, 
his  calm  look  directed  to  the  ground,  but  with  dignity. 
Of  the  habits  one  can  only  say  that  they  even  surpass 
those  of  the  St.  Hugo  in  the  Refectory  and  those  of  St. 
Peter  Nolasco. 

St.  Bonaventura  visited  by  an  Angel  is  another  of  the 


119 


great  works  of  the  master;  of  a Riberescan  style  it  is  su- 
perior to  the  best  of  Ribera.  The  Saint  kneeling  before 
a table  upon  the  centre  of  which  is  a papal  tiara,  looks 
sweetly  at  a young  angel  who  speaks  to  him  (from  a 
corner  of  the  sky  which  opens  in  the  upper  right  part  of 
the  canvas)  telling  him  what  Cardinal  ought  to  be 
elected  Pope.  Back  of  St.  Bonaventura  and  near  an 
enormous  door  are  two  groups  of  Cardinals.  Three  of 
them  are  kneeling  and  looking  at  the  scene,  and  the  other 
six  are  talking  beyond  the  doorway,  bathed  in  the  full 
light  of  the  courtyard  of  the  cloister. 

Of  a more  complicated  composition  though  most  natu- 
ral is  the  SL  Bonaventura  visited  by  St.  Thomas  to  whom 
he  shows  the  Crucified  as  the  Origin  of  his  knowledge. 
St.  Thomas  and  the  four  monks  who  accompany  him  have 
scarcely  entered  the  cell  when  St.  Bonaventura  draws 
aside  the  curtains  which  hide  the  image  of  the  Crucified, 
and  the  Holy  Doctor  stands  in  admiration  before  it, 
showing  in  his  attitude  and  the  position  of  his  hands  the 
surprise  which  overwhelms  him.  The  two  Saints,  the 
monks  grouped  near  the  door,  the  books  and  the  skull 
placed  upon  a shelf  in  the  background,  the  table,  the 
chair,  all  the  figures  and  all  the  details  are  perfect;  and 
this  is,  in  my  opinion,  one  of  the  most  complete  pictures  of 
the  artist,  one  in  which  he  shows  a talent  for  composition 
and  a technique  equal  to  that  which  characterizes  the  St. 
Bonaventura  presiding  over  a Chapter  of  the  lesser  Friars 
and  its  companion  the  Funeral  of  a Saint. 

In  the  Child  Jesus  wounding  his  Finger  while  weaving 
a Crown  of  Thorns,  owned  by  D.  Cayetano  Sanchez  Pin- 
eda, of  Seville,  Zurbaran  arrived  at  the  culmination  of 
realism  in  the  arrangement  of  the  figure,  expression  of 


120 


countenance  and  mien.  The  Son  of  God  seated  on  a 
rough  bench,  and  with  the  crown  upon  his  knees  is  pinch- 
ing with  the  right  hand  the  forefinger  of  the  left,  from 
which  comes  a drop  of  blood.  It  is  a most  finished  study 
and  really  enchanting. 

It  is  not  easy  to  state  which  of  the  works  just  enumer- 
ated were  made  before  the  others;  and  further,  judging 
by  the  merits  of  each  one,  they  would  have  been  painted 
in  the  order  in  which  they  are  mentioned;  thus  Zurba- 
ran’s  progress  is  clearly  seen,  as  his  touch  is  each  time 
more  firm  and  assured. 

Of  1630  is  the  Blessed  Alonso  Rodriguez  in  the  Acad- 
emy of  San  Fernando.  This  work  has  many  admirers. 
The  figures  could  not  be  better  executed,  but  the  com- 
position of  the  Glory  is  not  so  successful ; there  is  nothing 
remarkable  in  it  except  the  tunic  of  the  angel  who  ap- 
pears in  the  foreground  which  is  splendidly  done.  The 
Blessed  Rodriguez  and  the  angel  who  accompanies  him 
are  two  figures  of  the  first  order.  On  the  other  hand, 
neither  Mary  nor  Jesus  showing  their  hearts  (which  they 
hold  in  their  hands  in  the  manner  of  carnival  toys),  nor 
the  group  of  angels  in  the  opposite  angle,  nor  the  heads 
of  the  seraphim  who  gather  at  the  Redeemer’s  feet  nor 
that  of  his  divine  Mother  seem  appropriate  to  me. 

In  1631  the  Extremadurian  master  signed  the  canvas 
of  the  Holy  Face  (owned  by  D.  Mariano  Pacheco,  of 
Madrid,  and  very  interesting)  and  the  famous  great  pic- 
ture of  the  Apotheosis  of  St.  Thomas  A..quinas  already 
described  by  Sentenach  and  Lefort,  a truly  grand  paint- 
ing and  the  most  intimate  and  best  interpreted  that  can 
be  imagined.  The  four  Doctors  of  the  Church  who  sur- 
round St.  Thomas  are  rendered  in  minute  detail,  and  the 


121 


Saint,  the  figures  of  Christ  and  his  Mother,  those  of  St. 
Paul  and  St.  Dominic,  and  the  background  of  celestial 
glory  show  a profound  study  and  great  depth  of  reflec- 
tion. The  figures  kneeling  in  the  lower  third  of  the 
canvas  reveal  a superb  series  of  personal  portraits. 
Finally,  as  Araujo  and  Sanchez  say:  “as  well  in  the  whole 
of  the  composition  as  in  the  details,  the  method  of  Zur- 
baran’s  work  is  shown,  each  part  being  conscientiously 
studied  by  itself.” 

The  SL  Lawrence  of  the  Hermitage  of  St.  Petersburg, 
signed  1636,  is  one  of  the  most  sublime  I have  seen.  In  a 
beautiful  landscape  extending  both  in  the  background 
and  foreground,  the  Saint  appears  standing,  with  an 
enormous  gridiron  in  his  left  hand,  the  right  resting  open 
upon  his  breast.  He  is  dressed  in  all  the  sacred  habili- 
ments as  if  he  were  about  to  celebrate  the  mass,  with  his 
countenance  raised  and  his  looks  directed  heavenward. 
The  embroideries  on  the  chasuble  are  painted  with  scrup- 
ulous minuteness  and  the  face  is  filled  with  an  expression 
of  ineffable  happiness.  The  white  draperies  are  worthy 
of  the  brush  that  painted  them. 

The  reader  already  knows  the  different  opinions  that 
have  been  expressed  about  the  Hercules  of  the  Prado. 
Among  them,  there  are  that  of  Hercules  killing  the  Hy- 
dra in  the  Swamps  of  Lerna  which  is  considered  authentic 
and  the  Hercules  subduing  the  Bull  which  Neptune  sent 
against  Minos  which  is  thought  doubtful.  I do  not  find 
the  difference  of  style  which  Lefort,  first,  and  then  other 
critics  have  discovered.  The  anatomical  study  of  the 
nudes  is  the  same,  the  colors  employed  are  identical  and 
the  drawing  characteristic  of  Zurbaran,  although  they 
may  not  be  his;  but  if  it  was  not  Zurbaran,  who  painted 


122 


them — with  the  same  light,  the  same  model  and  almost 
in  the  same  state  of  mind — what  painter  so  exactly  re- 
peats any  subject  with  the  faithfulness  of  a photographic 
camera  ? 

The  Adoration  of  the  Shepherds-  may  be  by  Velasquez, 
as  was  formerly  believed,  but  the  manner  of  painting  the 
cloths,  the  light  and  the  drawing  are  Zurbaranesque. 

The  Annunciation  of  the  Carthusian  of  Jerez,  like  its 
companions  the  Adoration  of  the  Shepherds,  the  Adora- 
tion of  the  Kings  and  the  Circumcision  would  honor  the 
greatest  of  masters.  They  are  perfectly  executed. 

In  the  Annunciation,  the  Virgin  is  praying  before  a low 
desk  on  which  rests  an  open  book,  when  the  archangel 
appears  behind  her  and  causes  her  to  turn  her  head  to- 
ward the  open  door.  Between  the  two  figures  is  a jar 
of  lilies,  and  beyond  them  a great  door  through  which  a 
landscape  is  seen  and  the  facade  of  a building  (castle  or 
palace),  and  in  the  upper  part  of  the  picture,  amidst 
luminous  clouds,  the  Holy  Spirit  presides  over  choirs  of 
lovely  angels. 

The  Adoration  of  the  Shepherds  in  the  collection  of 
the  Carthusians  of  Jerez,  signed  1638,  differs  in  compo- 
sition from  the  one  in  the  National  Gallery,  although  the 
figure  of  the  Virgin  is  made  from  the  same  model.  She 
raises  with  both  hands,  the  coverings  from  the  nude  In- 
fant Jesus,  looking  lovingly  at  him,  as  does  St.  Joseph, 
who  is  at  her  side.  A youthful  angel  sings  back  of  Mary, 
another  young  seraph  plays  the  harp  in  the  sky,  and  eight 
young  cherubs  contemplate  the  scene  in  adoration. 
There  are  other  figures,  such  as  the  woman  offering  a 
basket  of  eggs  and  an  old  man  praying  which  are  emi- 
nently naturalistic. 


123 


The  Adoration  of  the  Magi  is  a gem  of  unmatched 
painting.  Here  the  Child  is  dressed,  and  upon  the  knees 
of  His  divine  Mother,  behind  whom  is  St.  Joseph.  One 
of  the  kings  is  adoring  the  Son  of  God,  the  others  gaze  at 
Him  waiting  for  Him  to  rise  when  they  will  kneel  them- 
selves. In  the  centre  of  the  picture  is  a gentleman 
richly  attired  in  the  warlike  fashion  of  the  artist’s  day. 

The  Circumcision  does  not  discredit  the  three  former 
canvases,  in  composition  or  drawing,  nor  in  the  expres- 
sion of  the  figures  which  are  completely  Velasquean.  It 
is  another  beautiful  page  in  the  artist’s  work  and  the 
young  man  in  the  foreground  is  surpassingly  realistic. 

The  Saviour  Blessing  the  Worlds  owned  by  Senora 
Iturbe,  signed  in  1638,  the  same  year  as  the  Adoration  of 
the  Shepherds  of  Jerez,  is  in  a style  quite  distinct  from 
that  work.  The  tunic  is  masterly  and  done  in  a manner 
appropriate  to  Zurbaran,  in  that  of  his  best  epoch,  but 
the  head  shows  Italian  influence  and  the  hand  placed 
upon  the  globe  seems  more  in  the  style  of  Greco. 

Zurbaran  was  not  monotonous  nor  always  alike  in  his 
work,  as  has  been  commonly  believed.  He  often 
changed  his  manner,  even  within  a single  year,  and  this 
explains  why  the  pictures  which  lacked  his  signature  or 
were  not  like  the  others,  frequently  aroused  doubt  as  to 
their  authenticity. 

Quite  different  from  his  magnificent  canvas,  the  Sav- 
iour, is  the  Mass  of  Father  Cabahuelas,  in  the  Monastery 
of  Guadalupe,  signed  1638.  It  was  inspired  by  a miracle 
which  happened  to  this  Saint  when  celebrating  the  mass. 
He  saw  the  paten  rise  with  the  Host,  and  from  it  some 
drops  of  blood  were  issuing  and  falling  into  the  cup. 
The  expression  of  the  venerable  officiant  is  a mixture  of 


devotion  and  fear,  which  contrasts  with  the  serenity  of 
the  countenance  of  the  assistant,  who  is  not  aware  of 
what  is  occurring.  The  perspective  of  the  court  which  is 
seen  in  the  background,  the  embroideries  on  the  chasuble, 
the  draperies,  the  drawing,  the  position  of  the  hands  of 
the  two  figures  and  the  sure  grouping  of  the  whole  make 
this  great  work  truly  admirable,  and  the  head  of  the 
transfigured  Saint  is  beyond  all  praise. 

The  canvas  of  Our  Saviour  rewarding  the  Penance  of 
Father  Salmeron  who  kept  a vow  to  go  perpetually  on 
his  knees,  signed  1639,  is  another  of  the  most  beau- 
tiful works  of  Zurbaran.  The  figure  of  Father  Salmeron 
receiving  upon  his  brow  the  hand  of  Jesus  is  as  correct  in 
drawing,  truth,  color  and  simplicity  of  feeling  and  atti- 
tude, as  that  of  the  Saviour  who  stands  before  hirn  bare- 
foot on  the  ground;  the  pitying  look  of  the  Son  of  God 
makes  an  harmonious  contrast  with  the  humble  and  pious 
countenance  of  the  monk. 

Of  the  same  year,  1639,  is  the  painting  of  Father  Yatiez 
de  Figueroa,  “who,  as  Sr.  Tormo  says,  although  seeming 
to  accept  the  tiara  offered  by  Henry  the  Sad,  is  really  re- 
fusing it.”  If  it  were  not  for  the  signature  who  would 
say  that  this  work  is  Zurbaran’s?  It  does  not  resemble 
any  other  by  the  master,  although  its  artistic  value  is  by 
no  means  inferior  to  the  others.  But  where  are  the  Zur- 
baranesque  brush  strokes?  And  yet,  it  is  undoubtedly 
very  beautiful. 

It  is  rightly  stated  that  the  best  works  of  the  artist  are 
those  kept  in  the  Monastery  of  Guadalupe.  Here  Zur- 
baran was  confronted  with  the  real  friar  whom  he  chose 
as  a model  tor  his  work  Father  Gonzalo  Illescas.  As  well 
as  the  canvases  of  Father  Salmeron  and  Father  Yatiez 


de  Figueroa^  this  painting  bears  the  date  1639  and  repre- 
sents the  confessor  of  John  II  writing  on  a table  covered 
with  papers  and  books,  among  which  stand  a sand-clock 
and  a skull.  Very  admirable  is  the  perspective  of  the 
facade  of  the  convent  in  the  background,  at  the  upper 
left  side  of  the  spectators  seen  between  two  columns, 
through  which  the  light  enters  into  the  cell.  At  the  door 
of  the  holy  house  a friar  is  giving  alms  to  the  poor.  In 
spite  of  the  richness  and  splendid  interpretation  of  the 
accessories,  the  figure  of  Father  Illescas  attracts  all  the 
attention,  for  it  does  not  appear  like  a portrait  but  a liv- 
ing person  who  is  going  to  speak,  and  about  to  rise  and 
greet  someone  who  approaches.  His  expressive  and 
penetrating  gaze  united  with  the  gesture  of  the  right 
hand,  which  is  raised,  holding  the  pen  between  its  fingers, 
as  if  he  had  stopped  writing  for  the  moment  to  note  the 
presence  of  a visitor,  produces  the  impression  that  here  is 
the  living  man,  flesh  and  bone, — that  he  breathes,  ques- 
tions, and  is  about  to  reprimand  the  intruder  who  has 
come  to  interrupt  him  in  his  work. 

As  to  the  iS'/.  Jerome  scourged  by  Angels  of  the  same 
chapel  in  Guadalupe,  which  a keen  critic  says  is  not  by 
Zurbaran,  I not  only  think  it  is  by  him,  but  that  it  is  one 
of  his  best  and  most  characteristic  creations.  Who  but 
Zurbaran  could  have  painted  the  figure  of  Jesus  presid- 
ing over  the  celestial  chastisement,  and  the  draperies  of 
the  youthful  angels,  and  also  the  nude  torse  of  the  pun- 
ished Saint^ 

The  Pearl  of  Ziurbardn  or  At.  Jerome  ascending  to 
Heaven  among  charming  groups  of  cherubs,  offered  to 
the  painter  who  always  preferred  single  figures  the  oc- 
casion to  display  all  his  finest  artistic  qualities.  The 


126 


drawing  and  color  are  as  truthful  as  the  most  vivid  re- 
ality. The  hands  and  head  of  the  Saint  constitute  a 
beautiful  manifestation  of  expression,  and  the  composi- 
tion as  well  as  the  background  has  not  been  surpassed 
even  by  Murillo. 

In  the  SL  Francis,  of  Assisi  signed  1659,  and  owned  by 
D.  Aureliano  de  Beruete,  he  nearly  approached  the  sub- 
lime works  at  Guadalupe.  The  Saint  kneeling  before  a 
large  rock  which  serves  as  table,  lifts  his  right  hand  to  his 
breast  and  with  his  left  holds  a skull,  while  looking 
heavenward  in  a supplicating  attitude. 

The  Sf.  Francis  Assisi,  of  the  Museum  of  Seville, 
prays,  standing,  with  a crucifix  held  up  in  his  right  hand, 
showing  the  palm  of  his  left  with  its  miraculous  marks. 
The  Saint  gazes  toward  heaven,  as  in  Sr.  Beruete’s  pic- 
ture, and  is  equally  inspired. 

The  Jubilee  also  merits  praise,  not  only  for  the  Glory, 
the  figures  of  Jesus,  his  divine  Mother  and  the  angels, 
but  also  for  that  of  the  seraphic  monk  who,  already  de- 
scribed by  Codola,  is  on  his  knees,  his  head  raised,  with 
tears  in  his  eyes,  the  mouth  partly  open,  his  arms  ex- 
tended, the  face  drawn  and  forehead  corrugated,  sur- 
prised by  the  supernatural  vision  of  the  roses  scattered  on 
the  floor  of  his  cell  in  place  of  the  thorny  shrubs  upon 
which  he  was  torturing  himself  to  bring  from  heaven  the 
merits  of  the  Jubilee. 

The  St.  Francis  de  Paul  owned  by  Sr.  Macdougall  in 
Seville,  the  St.  John  the  Baptist  in  the  Desert,  the  St. 
Matthew,  the  Holy  Carthusian  Martyr,  the  St.  Bruno  at 
Prayer  of  the  Cadiz  Museum,  and  the  St.  Jacob  the 
Grand  are  six  figures  of  the  greatest  force,  each  one 
worthy  to  sustain  the  fame  of  a prodigious  master. 

127 


The  Blessed  Henry  Suzon  in  the  Seville  Museum  and 
the  St.  Catherine  owned  by  the  Infanta  Isabella  are  in 
execution  equal  to  their  companions  at  Guadalupe.  The 
Blessed  Suzon  is  a triumph  of  interpretation.  He 
wounds  his  breast  by  cutting  upon  it  with  a bistoury  the 
initials  I.  H.  S.,  reflecting  in  his  countenance  and  in  his 
beautiful  eyes  a sublime  mixture  of  joy  and  suffering 
which  converts  him  into  the  ideal  mystic,  for  his  suffer- 
ing is  not  caused,  as  Codola  says,  by  the  wound  in  his 
breast,  but  by  the  thought  that  his  torture  is  so  much  less 
than  that  endured  by  the  Redeemer. 

The  St.  Catherine  is  on  her  knees  before  a crucifix,  her 
elbow  resting  on  a prie-dieu  on  which  is  an  open  book. 
She  clasps  her  hands  in  an  attitude  of  prayer.  The 
crown  of  thorns  which  she  wears  alters  the  calmness  of 
her  features  which  appear  strained  and  suffering,  and 
there  is  a marked  expression  of  physical  pain  on  her  con- 
tracted forehead. 

The  St.  Casilda  of  the  Prado,  like  the  St.  Marina  and 
the  St.  Inez  of  the  Hospital  of  the  Blood  in  Seville,  is 
worthy  of  study  and  corresponds  to  Zurbaran’s  series  of 
pictures  where  expressive  realism  oversteps  the  bounds 
of  convention.  Instead  of  holy  women,  such  as  we 
imagine  them,  they  are  ladies  of  the  period,  richly 
dressed,  artistically  coiffed  and  with  a look  more  worldly 
than  spiritual,  showing  in  their  attitude  all  the  distinc- 
tion of  elegant  women. 

The  Virgin  with  the  sleeping  Child  in  her  Arms,  signed 
and  dated  1659,  and  property  of  the  Marquis  Unza  del 
Valle,  was  considered  by  the  critics  of  the  Zurbaran 
Pixhibition  of  1909,  as  a work  very  far  from  being  by  him. 
Sr.  Tormo  believed  it  to  be  by  an  imitator  of  Murillo 


and  Sr.  Viniegra  said,  “Were  it  not  for  the  signature 
which  appears  authentic  nothing  about  it  shows  the  pic- 
ture to  be  by  Zurbaran.” 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  same  model  which  served  for 
this  picture  was  also  used  by  the  master  for  the  SL  Inez 
and  the  Virgin  of  the  Rosary,  in  the  Hospital  of  the 
Blood  in  Seville.  It  is  sufficient  to  scrutinize  them  to  be 
convinced  of  this  fact.  The  same  face  is  seen  in  all 
three,  but  with  the  difference  that  in  St.  Inez  the  eyelids 
are  lowered,  as  in  the  one  owned  by  Unza  del  Valle. 

The  Child  is  also  the  same  in  this  canvas  as  in  the 
Rosary  and  both  works  are  superior  to  the  Virgin  of  the 
Mercy  now  the  property  of  the  Countess  of  Paris.  The 
Virgin  of  the  Mercy  shows  the  same  style  as  Zurbaran’s 
early  period  both  in  drawing  and  composition.  There 
are  here  mannerisms  and  a certain  hardness  very  char- 
acteristic of  Zurbaran.  The  Virgin  with  the  Child  asleep 
and  that  of  the  Rosary  on  the  contrary  reveal  a complete 
freedom  of  composition,  much  sweetness  in  the  outlines 
and  a method  like  Murillo.  They  are  works  very  dis- 
tinct from  the  usual  style  of  Zurbaran’s  paintings.  In 
the  Virgin  of  the  Rosary  Zurbaran’s  own  brush  work  is 
clearly  seen.  In  the  Child  Asleep  these  strokes  are  ab- 
sent, hence  the  doubts  of  the  critics,  because  it  has  been 
the  victim  of  restoration. 

The  picture  was  bought  in  the  Market,  in  Madrid,  by 
the  father  of  the  present  Marquis  Unza  del  Valle.  It 
had  some  defects,  and  before  placing  it  in  his  home,  he 
had  it  restored  by  Sr.  Madrazo  who  evidently  exceeded 
his  commission,  and  the  result  is  a picture  in  style  and 
drawing  very  different  from  the  original  one.  The  same 
thing  happened  to  Jesus  hearing  the  Cross,  owned  by  the 


129 


heirs  of  General  Gamir,  which  has  the  same  model  as  the 
Saviour  blessing  the  World  of  Senora  Iturbe,  which  also 
was  restored  by  D.  Alejo  Vera,  who  should  have  been 
more  careful  in  his  retouching. 

Although  he  excelled  in  pictures  of  religious  subjects, 
where  we  constantly  admire  Zurbaran  is  in  the  portraits; 
and  one  of  these,  very  little  known  to  Spaniards,  is  in  the 
Museum  of  Berlin.  It  is  believed  to  be  the  Infante  Don 
Baltasar  Carlos,  dressed  in  half  armour,  as  was  then  the 
fashion,  with  short  slashed  breeches  and  an  iron  cuirass 
across  whose  front  the  ribbon  and  cross  of  Calatrava  are 
visible.  Every  detail  of  heraldry  is  carefully  studied, 
and  the  face  is  of  an  enchanting  realism.  With  his  heavy 
locks  falling  upon  his  shoulders,  full  lips,  broad  nose, 
large  eyes  and  high  forehead,  the  young  Prince  appears 
here  as  he  undoubtedly  was  in  reality,  and  if  the  drawing 
is  firm  and  vigorous,  the  color  does  not  lag  behind  it. 

The  portrait  of  D.  Diego  Bustos  de  Lara,  owned  by 
the  Count  of  Gomar,  wearing  also  half  armour,  a casque 
on  head  and  a war  mace  in  the  right  hand,  in  the  attitude 
of  walking;  and  that  of  D.  Gonzalo  (owned  by  the  same 
gentleman),  fully  dressed  in  a tunic  with  fur  collar,  we 
have  two  canvases  so  splendid  that  they  would  be  gems 
for  even  the  best  of  museums,  and  which  proclaim  their 
author  the  king  of  portrait  painters. 

There  have  already  been  mentioned  many  portraits  of 
famous  ecclesiastics;  we  may  thus  place  beside  the  very 
best  those  which  the  Academy  of  San  Fernando  owns. 
There  are  few  artists  who  could  have  painted  the  habits, 
the  hands  and  heads  of  Lather  Pedro  Machado,  Father 
Francisco  Zumel,  Father  Jeronimo  Perez,  Father  Her- 
nando de  Sa?itiago  and  the  Mercenary  Friar  with  equal 


130 


art  and  truth  as  shown  by  the  artist  in  the  portrait  of 
Father  lllescas,  portraits  in  all  respects  comparable  to  the 
S>t.  Carmelo  of  the  Seville  Museum  and  the  Cardinal  Nic- 
olaus of  Cadiz. 

As  I have  already  stated,  Zurbaran  showed  certain  de- 
ficiencies in  some  mystical  pictures,  but  in  his  portraits 
he  invariably  remains  on  the  same  high  plane.  There  is 
not  one  that  is  not  superbly  done,  and  in  this  kind  of 
painting  he  was,  and  I even  venture  to  say,  he  is  inimi- 
table. He  was  so  in  his  ideal  Virgins  in  which  Murillo 
did  not  equal  him,  although  the  latter  was  undoubtedly 
inspired  by  Zurbaran’s  when  he  painted  his  own. 

The  Immaculate  Virgins  oi  Zurbaran  are  little  known. 
The  pictures  of  this  master  which  are  most  familiar  are 
chiefly  of  monks  and  martyrs,  grey  and  melancholy,  and 
it  has  been  supposed  that  these  were  his  only  subjects. 
But,  in  visiting  the  private  and  public  collections  of 
other  countries,  one  may  see  many  “Conceptions”  as  sub- 
lime as  can  well  be  imagined. 

There  are  in  Spain,  among  others,  two  which  it  is  much 
to  be  regretted  are  not  in  some  public  museum.  One  is 
the  property  of  the  Prince  of  Albania,  D.  Pedro  Aladro, 
and  the  other  of  the  Marquis  of  Cerralvo. 

The  drawing  and  composition  of  the  Inwiaculate  Con- 
ception of  D.  Pedro  Alardo  are  in  the  typical  manner  of 
Zurbaran  who  kept  for  this  picture  the  most  beautiful 
tones  of  his  palette.  The  angels,  the  clouds,  the  celes- 
tial expression  of  the  Virgin  and  the  pleating  of  her  man- 
tle and  tunic  are  rendered  with  genuine  love.  The  two 
young  clerics  who  are  kneeling  on  each  side  of  Mary  are 
the  most  realistic  possible  to  be  seen  in  this  kind  of  paint- 
ing. 


131 


The  Immaculate^  of  Marquis  of  Cerralvo,  appears  to 
be  a copy  of  that  of  Murillo  and  as  it  is  not  of  later  date, 
it  is  easy  to  deduce  which  artist  copied  the  other.  The 
position  of  the  hands,  the  attitude  of  the  head,  the  man- 
tle floating  in  the  wind,  the  angels  in  the  sky,  the  clouds 
and  even  the  colors  of  this  picture  offer  with  those  of 
Murillo  astonishing  points  of  similarity  which  are  worthy 
of  being  considered. 

But  the  Queen  of  Conceptions^  that  which  towers 
above  all  that  have  been  done  by  the  greatest  masters  in 
art,  is  the  one  in  the  Museum  of  Buda-Pest,  signed  1661. 

With  open  arms,  the  mantle  slightly  floating,  the  tunic 
with  ample  sleeves  lightly  clinging  to  the  body,  the  Vir- 
gin’s looks  are  directed  to  heaven,  and  her  feet  rest  upon 
exquisite  cherub  heads;  it  is  a picture  of  superhuman  in- 
spiration. 

In  the  same  year  as  the  Conception  of  Buda-Pest 
( 1661 ) , Zurbaran  signed  that  of  Jesus  replacing  his  Gar- 
7ne7^ts  after  Flagellation^  preserved  at  Jadraque,  which 
differs  greatly  from  the  former  one.  This  proves  how 
little  uniform  the  artist  was  in  his  work,  in  spite  of  the 
common  idea  that  has  been  formed  about  him. 

In  this  picture,  instead  of  aiming  at  true  characteriza- 
tion of  the  personage  he  represents,  he  limits  himself  to  a 
portrait;  he  did  not  paint  a Jesus^  but  simply  copied  his 
model.  The  position  of  the  figure,  the  muscles,  the  cinc- 
ture, the  tunic  which  he  lifts  up,  all  is  admirably  done, 
but  look  at  the  countenance  and  expression!  Is  it  pos- 
sible that  this  can  be  the  face  of  a man  who  has  just  been 
scourged,  who  still  feels  upon  his  body  the  stripes  of  the 
whip,  without  showing  the  least  evidence  of  pain,  and 
seeming  so  placid^ 


132 


On  the  contrary,  in  the  Christ  Crucified^  owned  by  the 
heirs  of  the  Marquis  of  Villafuerte  (not  dated)  the  ex- 
pression could  not  be  grander  or  more  touching.  Here 
we  see  Jesus  himself,  hanging  on  the  Cross  and  dying;  his 
face  is  contracted,  also  the  fingers  of  his  hands,  the  mus- 
cles are  strained  and  the  expression  is  superior  to  that  of 
the  celebrated  Christ  painted  by  Velasquez,  who  was  in- 
spired by  Zurbaran’s,  just  as  was  Murillo  when  painting 
his  Madonnas,  according  to  the  opinion  of  many 
critics.  . . . 

In  conclusion,  he  who  has  seriously  studied  the  paint- 
ings of  Zurbaran  in  their  order,  and  read  the  opinions  of 
the  majority  of  the  critics,  will  arrive  at  the  conviction 
that  the  artist  has  never  been  thoroughly  appreciated, 
and  that  when  he  is  known,  he  will  be  pronounced  one  of 
the  greatest  artists  in  or  out  of  Spain. 


^33 


APPENDIX  NO.  1 


Contract  of  Apprenticeship  of  Francisco  De  Zurbaran 

Know  all  persons  who  see  this  letter,  that  I don  Pedro  Delgueta 
Rebolledo  resident  of  the  city  of  Seville  in  the  quarter  of  San  Lor- 
enco,  by  the  name  and  voice  of  Luis  de  Curbaran  resident  of  the 
town  of  Fuente  de  Cantos,  and  in  virtue  of  the  power  I hold  from 
him,  which  was  given  in  this  town  before  Alonso  Garcia  public 
scrivener  the  19th  day  of  December  1613,  that  its  meaning  is  as 
follows : 

“In  the  town  of  Fuente  de  Cantos  the  19th  day  of  December 
1613,  before  me,  the  public  scrivener,  appeared  in  person  Luis  de 
Curbaran  resident  of  this  town,  and  gave  his  full  consent  to  don 
Pedro  Delgueta  Rebolledo  resident  of  Seville,  especially  in  order 
that  in  his  name  should  be  placed  and  put  in  the  office  of  the  painter 
his  son  Francisco  de  Curbaran,  for  the  time  which  would  be  con- 
venient and  settled,  obliging  him,  for  the  time  upon  which  they 
agree,  to  stay  with  and  assist  any  master  of  said  art,  thus  in  the 
city  of  Seville  as  well  as  elsewhere  and  to  the  effect  of  having  his 
said  son  taught,  Luis  de  Curbaran  would  pay  the  expenses  and 
other  things  agreed  upon  with  this  master  who  shall  be  obliged  to 
teach  him  said  art,  for  which  reason  he  may  make  with  any  masters 
in  his  own  name  any  written  contract,  with  the  conditions  and 
dues,  obligations,  penalties  and  salaries  which  he  would  deem  right; 
and  said  documents  being  dated  and  authorized  by  said  don  Pedro, 
and  being  accepted  those  which  said  master  or  masters  may  author- 
ize in  his  favor,  said  Luis  de  Curbaran  ratified,  approved  and  signed, 
and  considered  firm  and  sufficient  (according  to  formula),  and  as 
such  authorize  them  as  witnesses  Juan  Martin,  Agustin  Curbaran 
and  Marcos  Martin,  residents  of  this  town  and  it  is  signed  and 
sealed  by  the  undersigned  whom  I declare  known  to  me. 

Luis  de  Curbaran. 


134 


“And  I Alonso  Garcia  Blanco,  scrivener  to  the  King  our  lord, 
and  to  the  public  in  this  town  where  I was  present,  and  in  faith  of 
which  I sign  myself.” 

“In  Testimony  of  the  Truth  Alonso  Garcia,  Scrivener.” 
And  using  said  power  previously  mentioned,  I agree  and  know, 
that  I place  to  learn  the  art  of  painting  Francisco  de  Curbaran,  son 
of  said  Luis  de  Curbaran,  with  you  Pedro  Diaz  de  Villanueva, 
painter  of  images;  that  he  may  be  absent  for  the  time  of  three  years 
commencing  from  today,  the  date  of  this  letter,  and  further  on,  and 
in  order  that  during  this  time  you  will  help  him  well  and  conscien- 
tiously in  your  art  and  that  all  you  will  say  and  order  him  shall 
be  honest  and  leasable,  that  you  will  give  him  in  all  said  time  to 
eat,  drink,  shelter  and  a bed,  in  which  he  will  sleep  while  well  or 
ill,  but  all  his  clothes  and  shoes  which  in  said  time  he  would  need, 
his  father  has  to  furnish  him;  and  that  you  will  teach  him  your 
art  as  you  know  it,  without  demanding  from  him  anything  that 
would  take  him  away  from  work,  that  you  would  not  cease  to  teach 
him,  and  in  order  that  you  should  teach  him  said  art  with  better 
will,  I give  you  i6  ducats,  paid  in  the  following  manner:  eight 
ducats  which  I gave  and  remitted  to  you,  and  the  remaining  eight 
ducats  which  Luis  de  Curbaran  has  the  obligation  to  pay,  and  will 
pay,  in  this  said  city  of  Seville,  without  any  dispute,  within  a 
year  from  the  date  of  today,  according  to  law.  And  that  you 
should  care  for  said  Francisco  de  Curbaran,  you,  said  Pedro  Diaz 
de  Villanueva,  in  all  the  illnesses  which  during  that  time  he  may 
have,  provided  that  none  of  them  should  last  over  fifteen  days,  and 
if  it  were  more,  his  said  father  has  to  care  for  him  at  his  cost,  but 
that  in  that  time  the  minor  should  see  and  in  case  of  this  being  a 
damage  to  you,  you  should  remove  him,  and  if  you  could  not  remove 
him,  you  should  tell  him  (Luis  de  Curbaran)  and  let  him  know, 
in  order  that  he  should  provide  for  him;  and  that  the  things  he 
would  take  away,  or  do,  without  your  consent  and  from  under  your 
roof,  said  father,  cognizant  of  them,  should  pay  for  them  in  per- 
son and  with  his  means,  as  the  right  demands.  And  it  is  a condition 
that  if  said  Francisco  desired,  in  the  said  time  of  three  years,  to 
work  on  holidays;  all  he  should  thus  gain  would  be  for  himself, 
without  you,  the  master,  asking  anything  whatever  of  him. 

135 


This  letter  dated  in  Seville  the  15th  day  of  the  month  of  Jan- 
uary 1614,  and  said  partners  signed  it  with  their  names  in  the  reg- 
ister, and  I,  present  public  scrivener,  declare  that  I know  said  don 
Pedro,  and  said  don  Pedro  Diaz  de  Villanueva  presented  as  wit- 
nesses of  his  knowledge  who  swore  the  contents  to  be  in  lawful 
form,  whose  names  are  and  have  been,  Gabriel  Lopez.  , . , Pedro 
Delgate  Rrebolledo — Pedro  Diaz  de  Villanueva,  Mor.  de  Mor- 
ales, public  scrivener  of  Seville. 

Pedro  del  Carpio,  pub.  scr. 
Note  of  the  scrivener  upon  the  margin  of  the  document: 

“Said  don  Pedro  (of  San  Lorenzo)  has  agreed  with  said  Pedro 
de  Villanueva  (of  San  Salvador),  that  within  three  years  Fran- 
cisco de  Curbaran  would  be  taught,  and  he  (his  father)  would  pay 
him  16  ducats,  8 at  once,  and  8 after  the  first  year  and  half;  and 
that  his  father  has  to  clothe  him,  and  the  holidays  shall  be  for  his 
own  in  which  Francisco  the  apprentice  will  work.” 


136 


APPENDIX  NO.  2 


Memoranda  of  the  Cabildo  of  Seville 

OF  THE 

Moving  to  Seville  of  the  Residence  of  Zurbaran 

Sr.  Rodrigo  Suarez.  In  the  city  of  Seville  on  Wednesday,  June 
27,  1629,  in  the  town  hall,  an  order  of  the  king  was  seen  and  read, 
and  presented  in  writing  by  Sr.  Rodrigo  Suarez,  Alderman,  of 
the  following  context — 

Said  Rodrigo  Suarez  makes  known  to  the  city  how  the  convent 
of  the  Mercy  has  brought  from  the  city  of  Llerena  Francisco  de 
Surbaran  painter,  who  is  to  make  the  pictures  which  are  to  be 
placed  in  the  new  cloister  and  by  those  that  are  completed  and  by 
the  painting  of  Christ  which  is  in  the  sacristy  of  San  Pablo,  one 
can  judge  that  he  is  a consummate  artist. 

And  presupposing  that  art  is  not  the  least  ornament  of  a republic, 
but  rather  one  of  the  greatest,  as  much  for  temples  as  for  private 
houses,  which  are  full  of  such  works  (those  that  have  been  inhabited 
by  the  great  painters  the  kingdoms  have  had)  it  seems  that  the  city 
should  procure  that  the  said  Francisco  de  Surbaran  should  come  to 
live  here,  although  without  salary  or  aid  for  his  lodging,  for  this  is 
not  possible  considering  the  conditions  in  which  those  in  charge  of 
the  public  works  are,  at  least  with  complimentary  words  as  to  the 
satisfaction  they  take  in  being  served  by  him,  and  that  he  should 
know  that  this  single  act  without  any  other  thing,  seems  enough,  so 
that  he  knows  that  what  has  been  referred  to  should  take  place; 
and  that  the  city  should  see  and  consider  it,  and  examine  it 
as  most  convenient  for  her  service — Rodrigo  Suarez — Further  Sr. 
don  Pedro  Galindo  de  Abreu,  Alderman  and  chief  prosecutor, 
said  the  same,  and  then  said  the  same  don  Diego  Caballero  y 
Yllesca,  and  also  Antonio  de  Bobadilla,  Alderman. 


137 


It  has  been  seen  by  the  city  and  his  highness  don  Diego  F.  de 
Mendoca,  assistant  in  charge,  that  senor  Rodrigo  Suarez,  Aider- 
man,  in  the  name  of  the  city  should  say  to  the  said  Francisco  Sur- 
baran  how  much  the  city  would  wish,  and  take  pleasure,  in  having 
him  as  a resident  in  the  republic,  that  he  should  come  to  live  here 
for  the  most  part,  and  for  the  favorable  opinion  they  had  of  him, 
and  on  the  part  of  the  city,  asked  the  assistant  to  have  the  goodness 
to  call  on  him,  and  ask  him  to  come  to  her,  and  that  the  city  would 
give  whatever  would  please  him,  and  aid  him  in  all  things  which  he 
might  need;  and  that  the  city  would  take  special  pleasure  in  as- 
sisting him  and  helping  him. 

In  the  city  of  Seville  on  Wednesday  29th  day  of  May,  1630, 
in  the  town  hall,  was  seen  a petition  by  Alonso  Cano,  painter, 
in  which  it  was  said  that  “it  came  to  his  knowledge  that 
Francisco  de  Zurbaran,  painter,  presented  a petition  before  the 
city,  which  was  important,  as  the  reasons  of  this  matter  will  prove, 
(sic)  and  asks  that  the  city  should  examine  Francisco  de  Zurbaran 
or  give  permission  in  order  that  her  laws  should  be  used  as  is  right 
concerning  said  petition — Seen  by  the  city  and  by  his  highness  Sr. 
D.  Diego  Hurtado  de  Mendoca  Viscount  de  la  Corzana,  assistant; 
it  has  been  agreed  that  this  petition  be  joined  to  the  one  it  refers  to 
(sic),  and  that  it  should  be  brought  forth,  as  it  has  been  entered  in 
the  book  of  the  cabildo  to  which  I am  referring. 

In  virtue  of  this  agreement  of  the  city  aforesaid,  and  of  the  re- 
quest of  Alonso  Cano,  painter,  I had  an  extract  and  took  a copy  of 
the  petition  to  which  said  agreement  alluded,  and  whose  contents 
are  as  follows:  Francisco  de  Zurbaran,  painter,  says  that  “I  hav- 

ing come  from  the  city  of  Llerena  to  paint  the  sacristy  of  the  con- 
vent of  San  Pablo,  and  the  paintings  of  the  cloister  of  the  convent 
of  our  Lady  of  Mercy  in  that  city,  your  highness  agreed  to  ask  me 
to  come  to  this  city  to  stay,  and  doing  me  the  honor  to  declare  in 
the  agreement  that  they  held  me  as  a man  ol  distinction  able  to  add 
lustre  to  the  name  of  the  city,  and  the  works  of  the  churches,  so  that 
his  highness  the  secretary  sent  for  me  and  I,  gratefully  recogniz- 
ing such  a compliment,  in  spite  of  all  inconveniences  brought 
my  house  and  domicile  to  this  city,  doing  the  works  known  to 

138 


your  highness  and  to  the  master  painters  who  had  felt  jealousy 
of  the  graciousness  that  your  highness  was  doing  me,  and  wanted 
to  compel  me  to  be  examined,  and  for  such  came  yesterday,  Thurs- 
day 23rd  day  of  May,  said  masters  with  a public  scrivener,  and  an 
officer  of  the  law,  that  they  should  examine  me  within  the  third 
day,  saying  that  it  was  against  the  law  not  to  be  examined,  it 
being  true  that  the  intention  of  your  highness  in  giving  your  orders 
was  that  no  ignorant  men  should  paint,  and  I having  your  approval, 
in  which  I am  held  for  a distinguished  man,  and  having  showed  it 
to  said  master  painters,  it  is  not  right  that  they  should  claim  any 
power  to  approve  or  reprove  that  which  your  highness  does,  nor  can 
it  be  understood  that  the  order  was  given  to  examine  a man  already 
approved  by  your  highness.  In  view  of  whatever  acts  said  master 
painters  may  have  done  against  my  appeal  to  your  highness,  to 
whom  I beg  and  ask  that  I be  declared  free  from  any  further  ob- 
ligation, once  being  approved  by  your  highness,  and  that  your 
highness  should  continue  the  kindness  which  has  been  promised  in 
said  agreement,  of  which  I avail  myself,  I ask  justice  and  costs, 
and  for  this  the  scrivener  should  come  and  make  the  report” — 
Francisco  de  Zurbaran  Salazar. 

At  the  head  of  said  petition  is  the  decree  signed  and  approved 
by  the  viscount  assistant  which  says — “The  25th  of  May,  1630,  the 
scrivener  and  the  masters  of  the  painters  should  come  at  once  and 
make  their  declaration.” 

“And  said  decree  was  notified  to  me,  and  to  said  masters  by  Chris- 
tobal  de  Herrera,  scrivener,  who  remitted  me  said  petition  without 
any  other  statement,  and  in  consequence  of  which  I went  to  place 
my  declaration  before  his  highness  the  viscount  assistant,  and  in 
order  to  leave  a proof  of  said  request  I gave  the  present  writing,  the 
29th  day  of  May,  in  Seville,  1630,  in  faith  of  which  I sign  myself 
as  testimony  of  the  truth.” 

Antonio  Martinez  de  Acosta,  scrivener — Witness. 


139 


APPENDIX  NO.  3 


Letter  of  D.  Elias  Tormo  y Monzo  upon  the  Labors  of 

H ercules 

Zurbaran  and  the  Labors  of  Hercules  in  the  Palace  of  Buen 
Retire. 

Sr.  D.  Jose  Cascales  y Munoz: 

Although  several  weeks  have  passed,  I have  not  wanted  to  give 
you  the  promised  notes  upon  the  canvases  of  the  Labors  of  Her- 
cules  of  the  Prado,  attributed  to  Zurbaran,  without  verifying  a 
little  the  information  on  this  interesting  theme. 

It  has  been  said  that  I knew  that  these  paintings  were  done  not  in 
1650  when  the  well  known  visit  of  Zurbaran  to  Madrid  (perhaps 
the  only  one)  took  place,  but  before  1637,  a statement  unproved, 
permit  me  to  assert  in  the  most  final  manner.  The  best  known  of 
recent  biographies  of  our  painter  were  in  error,  as  I was — as  all 
were. 

“He  must  have  produced  much”  says  Sr.  Viniegra,  “in  all  those 
years,  (he  refers  to  the  fourth  decade  of  the  17th  century)  and  per- 
haps he  remained  unknown  on  account  of  his  work  until  1650;  at 
this  date  he  reappears  in  Madrid,  called  by  Velasquez,  by  order  of 
Philip  IV  to  paint  the  canvases  which  adorn  the  little  salon  of 
the  palace  of  Buen  Retiro. 

“These  were  the  Labors  of  Hercules,  a collection  of  ten  works 
which  today  form  a part  of  this  Museum. 

“This  kind  of  painting  could  not  have  been  much  to  his  taste,  as, 
according  to  Cean,  he  only  painted  four,  the  others  being  done  under 
his  direction.  I believe  this,  and  I venture  to  name  those  that  are 
by  his  hand.” 

I have  confessed  that  I too  was  in  this  error,  I now  ought  to  give 
full  proof  of  the  established  truth. 


140 


In  the  first  quarterly  of  the  current  year  1911  of  the  Bulletin  of 
the  Spanish  Society  of  Research,  I have  a study  entitled:  “Velaz- 

quez, the  Salon  of  the  Kings  at  Buen  Retiro,  and  the  Poet  of  the 
Palace  and  of  the  Painter.”  I should  have  to  recur  to  the  con- 
vincing and  detailed  facts  which  I have  brought  forth  in  my  argu- 
ment, if  the  question  were  here,  as  it  is  chiefly  there,  to  prove  that 
the  royal  equestrian  portraits  were  painted  for  the  mentioned  Salon, 
by  Velazquez.  As  to  the  ten  paintings  of  the  Labors  of  Hercules, 
on  the  contrary,  no  proof  is  needed  to  know  those  which  proceed 
from  this  Salon,  and  which  the  catalogue  of  the  Museum  mentions. 
I have  seen  it  confirmed  with  great  certainty  by  the  inventories  of 
1703,  1709  and  1793,  apart  from  what  D.  Antonio  Ponz  clearly 
says  in  1775. 

This  opinion  is  not  without  proof  in  the  poetic  text  whereby  I 
have  been  able  to  show,  in  the  study  spoken  of,  which  were  the 
works  of  art  created  for  this  principal  Salon  of  the  Palace  of  Buen 
Retiro.  A contemporary  poet  describes  the  paintings  of  Velaz- 
quez, the  scenes  of  glorious  battles  by  the  victorious  Spanish  armies 
of  the  day — canvases  by  V.  Carducho,  E.  Caxes,  Jusepe  Leonardo, 
Felix  Castelo,  Pereda,  Father  Mayno  and  Juan  de  la  Corte,  and 
is  as  follows: 

“See  in  the  lofty  friezes  of  the  balconies 
How  the  sovran  pencil  limns 
With  valiant  strokes  the  celebrated  Theban. 

Be  tranquil,  O Juno,  pursue  not  Alcides, 

Whom  Art  here  presents  in  all  his  woe 
With  such  surpassing  magic. 

And  does  but  add  duration  to  his  labor. 

Here  shines  resplendent  the  immortal  lo, 

Here  lives  the  Lion,  here  Achilles  lives 

Eternal  is  his  task,  and  here 

Eternal  shall  remain  the  wild  beast  of  Lerna.” 

Of  what  date  is  this  poetic  text?  The  book  was  published  in 
1637,  and  in  the  same  year  the  license  was  granted  by  the  Intendant, 
July  15th;  the  approbation  of  D.  Pedro  Calderon  de  la  Barca,  Au- 
gust 7 th,  and  the  Tax,  October  16th,  1638. 

141 


The  inauguration  of  the  Palace,  or  at  least  of  a part  of  it,  and 
of  the  park,  was  in  1632.  The  work  was  begun  in  1630. 

The  poetical  composition  appeared  then  at  the  latest  in  the  early 
months  of  1637,  and  the  ten  pictures  of  the  Labors  of  Hercules 
could  only  be  of  1636,  at  the  latest. 

This  correction  of  dates  holds  an  important  place  in  the  biog- 
raphy of  the  painter,  if  the  canvases  are  his,  or  part  of  them.  At 
once,  one  could  understand,  better  than  with  the  explanation  judi- 
ciously given  by  Sr.  Sentenach,  that  Zurbaran  signed  as  painter  to 
the  King  one  of  those  splendid  paintings  of  the  Carthusian  Monas- 
tery of  Jerez,  today  in  Randan  (Auvergne).  (I  believe  I have 
told  you  of  this  shameful  Odessy,  shameful  on  the  part  of  a good 
many  Spanish  governors.®’^ ) 

Knowing  that  part  of  these  paintings,  the  only  ones  dated  are  of 
1634  (three  by  Carducho),  and  that  the  Count  Duke  would  not 
admit  of  delays  in  the  stupendous  buildings  of  this  delightful  royal 
retreat,  this  date,  1634,  seems  to  be  indicated  as  the  most  probable 
for  all  the  work  of  the  eight  or  ten  painters  who  at  the  time 
worked  for  the  Salon  of  honor.  If  Zurbaran,  slightly  before  or 
after  1634,  went  to  Madrid  and  painted  the  Labors  of  Hercules  it 
will  explain  why,  on  his  return  to  Andalusian  soil,  he  came  with 
the  title,  for  the  most  part  honorary,  of  painter  to  the  King,  and 
thus  signed  himself  in  1638. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  refer  to  the  pictures  he  made  in  Seville,  in 
the  interior  of  the  ship  constructed  for  the  lake  of  the  Retiro,  and 
it  also  better  explains  how  in  1639  he  held  the  duties  not  entirely 
professional,  of  the  Superintendency  of  the  Royal  House. 

The  statement  of  Palomino,  mistaken  as  to  time,  may  be  retro- 
verted  16  years,  for  he  says:  “Ultimately  he  went  to  Madrid  in 

1650,  called  by  Velazquez,  by  order  of  His  Majesty,  where  he 
executed  the  pictures  of  the  Labors  of  Hercules,  which  are  in  the 
little  Salon  of  the  Buen  Retiro,  upon  four  great  canvases;  and  it  is 
said  that  while  he  was  painting  there,  among  the  many  times  that 
Philip  IV  passed  by  to  observe  them,  he  one  day  placed  a hand  on 
Zurbaran’s  shoulder,  exclaiming:  “Painter  to  the  King  and  King 

of  Painters.” 


142 


Notice  here  that  nothing  is  said  about  the  signature  on  these 
paintings,  which  positively  have  none.  I have  examined  them 
closely. 

The  four  positions  of  painter  to  the  King  being  filled  at  that 
time  by  Carducho,  Caxes,  Nardi  and  Velazquez,  the  title  could  only 
be  given  as  honorary  to  Zurbaran,  and  so  it  was,  as  facts  prove, 
first  verbally,  then  in  writing,  as  in  many  other  cases  it  has  been 
done  in  the  history  of  our  art. 

But  if  the  clearing  up  of  the  date  of  the  Hercules  explains  satis- 
factorily, and  even  better  than  before,  the  mere  biography  of  the 
artist,  into  what  great  confusion  are  we  thrown  to  logically  explain 
the  technical  and  aesthetic  evolution  of  the  painter’s  style! 

I confess,  friend  Cascales,  I see  it,  and  do  not  believe  it. 
Among  his  signed  works  of  1629,  for  example,  and  his  greatest  ones 
of  1638  and  1639,  those  of  Jerez  and  Guadelupe,  to  which  I have 
dedicated  respective  studies,  the  paintings  of  the  Labors  of  Her- 
cules form  an  episode  of  the  imitation  of  Velazquez,  which  is  not 
in  harmony  with  the  ones  produced  immediately  before,  neither 
with  those  that  followed  immediately  afterward.  Such  disagree- 
ment, such  a considerable  deviation  in  the  natural  trend  of  his 
genius,  causes  me  to  doubt  the  text  of  Palomino,  and  to  question 
again  the  attribution  to  Zurbaran  of  these  paintings. 

Through  an  oversight,  through  forgetting  to  copy  the  original 
inventory  of  the  pictures  in  the  Buen  Retiro  of  1703,  which  is  the 
oldest  that  we  are  acquainted  with,  they  omitted  to  state  the  name 
of  the  author  of  the  first  of  these  pictures,  and  in  the  second  and 
following  ones  it  is  simply  said — “by  the  same  artist” — “by  the 
same  artist” — “by  the  same,”  placing  in  doubt  to  whom  the  kingly 
painters  Lucas  Jordan,  Arredondo  and  Ruiz  de  la  Iglesia  would 
attribute  them, — Palomino  set  aside.  (Above  all  Arredondo  who 
is  the  one  that  authorized  the  inventory  of  the  Retiro). 

In  my  study  of  the  Bulletin,  all  that  part  of  the  inventory  is 
copied,  and  I can  only  say  that  equal  forgetfulness  has  damaged 
it,  and  this  is  also  shown  in  another  inventory  of  1709  which  I 
recently  examined  in  the  Archives  of  the  Palace,  in  order  to  give 
you  more  complete  information.  The  inventory  of  1709  is  the 


143 


copy  of  the  one  made  in  1703,  placing  under  the  care  of  D.  An- 
tonio de  Mayens  the  treasures  and  furniture  of  the  Buen  Retiro. 
(V.  5,  of  the  Inventories  at  the  death  of  Charles  II,  page  671). 

Still  seeking  further  information,  I searched  thoroughly  all  the 
royal  inventories  of  the  Retiro.  That  of  1772  said  nothing,  be- 
cause it  described  no  pictures  except  the  new  ones,  and  in  great  num- 
bers they  had  been  brought  there  after  the  fire  of  the  old  Alcazar 
in  1734.  It  follows  chronologically  the  text  of  Ponz,  1775,  which 
following  the  text  of  Palomino  says:  “Among  this  collection 

(the  grand  battle  pictures)  are  others  of  lesser  size,  that  are  by 
Francisco  de  Zurbaran  who  showed  the  great  desire  to  put  into  them 
his  best  work.  These  like  his  other  works  manifest  strong  force  of 
claro-obscuro.” 

A few  years  passed,  and  at  the  death  of  Charles  III,  a general 
inventory  comes  to  prove  to  us  that  it  was  not  settled  as  a public 
opinion,  nor  even  by  the  documents  of  inventories  of  the  Palac^ 
and  of  the  royal  painters,  that  to  Zubaran  belonged  all  the  works 
that  the  two  former  writers  attributed  to  him.  It  is  necessary  to 
know  these  inventories  to  understand  the  value  of  the  estimations, 
as  the  greater  part  of  the  pictures  show  up  feebly,  and  since  said 
documents  had  been  the  source  of  information  for  Palomino,  and 
for  Ponz,  at  that  time.  Even  the  errors  have,  there,  a logical 
explanation  when  we  read  consecutively  the  various  inventories. 

Then,  in  the  general  inventory  of  1789  of  the  corresponding 
part  of  the  Buen  Retiro  which  Maella  authorized  in  1794,  the  pic- 
tures of  the  Labors  of  Hercules  are  described  more  or  less  as  in  the 
list  of  1703;  but  when  describing  the  first  of  these  works,  they  for- 
got the  name  of  the  artist,  and  write:  “School  of  Lanfranco.” 

Indeed,  in  these  inventories  they  put  upon  each  of  these  works  the 
price  of  a thousand  reales,  and  formerly  in  the  list  of  1703,  the 
price  was  1500  reales, — and  in  the  same  inventory  the  Surrender  of 
Breda  by  Velazquez  was  appraised  at  30,000  reales. 

A very  few  years  pass,  and  Cean  Bermudez  in  his  well  known 
dictionary  (1800)  quoting  Ponz,  as  he  almost  always  does,  but  here 
exceptionally  rectifying  him  in  some  places,  he  mentions  among 
the  pictures  of  the  Buen  Retiro,  the  Labors  of  Hercules  as  works  of 
Zubaran  in  four  canvases,  forgetting  the  six  remaining  ones, 

144 


A few  years  afterward,  the  Museum  of  the  Prado  was  formed, 
and  there  soon  appeared  the  ten  canvases  always  classified  as  by 
Zurbaran.®®  I do  not  know  a critic  who  would  attribute  to  him  the 
entire  collection.  They  are  absolutely  unworthy  of  being  called 
by  the  name  of  a great  painter,  those  which  represent  Calpe  and 
Abyla,  the  Giants,  the  Numean  Lion,  and  that  of  Anteus;  that  of 
the  Boar  is  a little  better,  and  also  that  of  the  Bull  of  Crete  and  the 
River  Alpheus. 

There  may  be  three  which  deserve  to  be  classed  as  the  work  of  a 
great  artist,  imitator  of  Velazquez,  the  Velazquez  of  the  Coat  of 
Joseph  and  the  Forge,  painted  in  1630.  The  Fight  with  Cerberus, 
the  Shirt  of  Nessus,  and  above  all  the  canvas  of  the  Hydra  of  Lerna 
continually  show  that  the  artist  was  an  excellent  imitator  of  Velaz- 
quez’s nudes.  I can  affirm  this  because  in  the  preparation  for  the 
Zurbaran  Exposition  of  1905,  they  were  seen  more  clearly  and 
closer.  But  if  there  be  one,  or  three,  or  four,  or  five,  or  ten  of 
the  paintings  which  might  be  attributed  to  Zurbaran,  the  problem 
is  the  same:  they  disconcert  and  transform  the  logical  lines  of  the 
historical  progress  of  his  art,  which  was  already  personal  and  un- 
mistakable in  1638 — and  nothing  personal,  but  the  very  opposite, 
is  in  the  Hercules,  if  they  are  his,  painted  between  these  two  dates. 

The  solution  of  this  problem  which  my  correction  of  dates  sug- 
gests, will  only  be  found,  I think,  in  documental  sources;  when 
these  will  be  discovered,  I know  not,  nor  where;  perhaps  in  the 
Archives  of  the  Palace,  in  those  of  Simancas,  or  in  the  Historical 
Archives,  or  perhaps  in  the  papers  of  the  Council  of  Aragon,  or  in 
those  of  Portugal.  When  the  long  hidden  history  of  the  splen- 
did works  of  the  Retiro  will  be  brought  to  light,  then  we  shall  be 
able  to  clear  up  the  biography  of  Zurbaran,  as  well  as  that  of 
Velazquez. 

Nevertheless,  so  far  I cannot  do  less  than  confess  to  a new  sur- 
prise: that  among  the  eight  or  ten  painters  who  together  and  in 
competition  painted  the  canvases  of  the  Salon  of  the  Kings,  we 
have  not  even  heard  the  name  of  the  Spanicized  Italian,  Angelo 
Nardi,®®  who  was  at  the  time  one  of  the  four  painters  to  the  King. 
May  not  all,  or  a good  part  of  the  Labors  of  Hercules  be  his,  those 
which  in  1794  were  attributed  to  the  School  of  Lanfranco? 

145 


To  compensate  for  the  unhappy  negative  effect  of  this — not  the 
less  interesting  for  that — I renewed  my  search  and  shall  give  you 
proof  of  the  existence  of  two  pictures  of  the  first  importance  by 
Zurbaran  heretofore  I believe  wholly  undiscovered.  One  was  dis- 
covered by  Sr.  Gomez  Moreno  and,  authorized  by  him,  I communi- 
cate it  to  you.  It  is  a St.  Bonaventura  at  prayer,  figure  of  natural 
size,  a real  master-piece  which  is  kept  unknown  in  a convent  of 
Franciscan  nuns  in  Corunna.  The  authority  of  the  eminent  arche- 
ologist saves  us  from  all  doubt  about  the  canvas,  which  moreover 
shows  great  beauty.  The  other,^*^  I have  had  the  good  fortune  to  see 
myself  in  the  private  apartments  of  the  aged  mother  of  the  widow 
Iturbe,  on  the  occasion  of  my  study  of  the  Spanish  primitives  which 
she  had  just  bought.  . . . Natural  size,  three  quarter  bust,  rich  in 
color,  it  is  a Saviour,  with  a hand  placed  upon  a beautiful  blue 
sphere  of  the  world,  a painting  just  as  delightful  as  the  best  at 
Jerez  or  Guadalupe.  Thinking  of  the  publication  of  your  book, 
I secured  permission  to  take  a photograph  of  it,  and  you  should  in- 
clude it  among  the  engravings,  first  of  all  for  its  beauty,  which 
would  be  a sufficient  reason,  but  also  because  it  is  signed  and  dated, 
the  date  being  1638.  It  is  one  of  the  most  glorious  of  the  artistic 
labors  of  Zurbaran,  and  moreover,  is  one  of  the  paintings  that 
simplify  the  problem  of  this  letter,  leaving  to  the  readers,  together 
with  the  graphic  information  of  the  book,  the  elements  by  which 
they  may  form  an  opinion,  just  as  they  please,  whether  Zurbaran 
was  or  was  not  the  author  of  the  Labors  of  Hercules  of  the  Palace 
of  Buen  Retiro. 

Elias  Tormo. 


146 


APPENDIX  NO.  4 

A Letter  from  Zurbaran  to  the  Marquis  de  las  Torres 

This  letter  is  an  answer  to  the  Marquis  de  las  Torres  at  the 
time  when  the  workmen  asked  for  by  him  were  leaving  Seville — it  is 
preserved  in  the  documents  of  accounts,  “The  Pardo  and  its  De- 
pendencies,” in  the  Archives  of  the  Palace.  Written  by  Zurbaran 
in  a good  hand,  it  shows  that  the  artist  was  trying  to  please  his 
patron  of  the  Court  with  whom  he  was  on  cordial  terms. 

The  letter  is  as  follows: 

“As  I wish  to  comply  with  the  orders  of  your  Highness,  and 
serve  you  in  some  way  and  please  the  Count  of  Salvatierra  who  so 
carefully  fulfils  his  obligations,  I say  that  only  eleven  workmen 
are  going,  for  one  of  them  was  taken  ill  at  the  time  of  leaving  and 
I could  not  send  another  at  once,  because  all  were  on  horseback.  Of 
the  money  I received  which  was  1900  silver  ducats  which  reduced 
to  bullion  at  40%  made  2660  ducats,  I gave  to  the  owners  of  the 
mules  1400  reales  of  bullion,  and  between  the  gilders  I divided 
the  rest,  which  amounted  to  114  each,  which  makes  1260  ducats, 
which  united  with  the  1400  to  the  mule  owners  makes  a total  of 
2660  ducats.  The  workmen  who  go  are  (so  that  you  may  recog- 
nize them)  the  following:  Pedro  Montero,  Geronimo  de  la  Fu- 

ente,  Francisco  Baretto,  Francisco  Fonseca,  Francisco  Leal,  Juan 
Hamariz,  Sebastian  Rivas,  Valeriano,  Pedro  de  Armijo,  Manuel 
de  Aguilar  y Geronimo  Sanchez. 

“I  shall  esteem  it  a favor  if  your  Highness  would  kindly  give 
me  orders  about  other  things  that  shall  please  you,  to  which  I will 
attend  with  the  same  obligation  I owe  to  you. — May  God  give  to 
your  Highness  long  years  as  we,  your  servants,  pray. 

Francisco  de  Zurbaran. 

Seville  8th  of  October,  1639. 

P.  S.  The  said  workmen  are  poor  and  it  will  be  necessary  as 


147 


soon  as  they  arrive,  that  your  Highness  should  help  them  imme- 
diately, because  the  money  will  be  sufficient  only  for  the  journey.” 
This  from  Sr.  Sentenach: 

According  to  D.  Pedro  de  Mardrazo,  in  his  work  already  noticed, 
page  646,  the  workmen  “went  from  Seville  to  the  Court  on  the  8th 
of  October  1639,  and  were  nine  days  in  going  to  that  destination 
and  eleven  in  returning  home,  after  completing  their  work.” 


148 


APPENDIX  NO.  5 


Valuation  given  in  1654  by  Francisco  de  Zurbaran  and 

Francisco  de  Rici,  of  the  pictures  mentioned  in  the  last 

WILL  OF  Francisco  Jacinto  de  Salcedo 

That  indefatigable  man  of  research,  member  of  the  Spanish 
Academy,  D.  Cristobal  Perez  Pastor,  left  among  his  papers  an  in- 
teresting note  which  deciphered  by  D.  Francisco  Rodriguez  Marin 
gave  as  a result  the  discovery  of  a script  in  the  Archives  of  the 
Registry  of  Madrid : 

BILL  OF  SALE  AND  ACCOUNT  GIVEN  BY  D.  NICOLAS 
MARTINEZ  SERRANO — Year  1664 — Pages  171  to  174. 

Will  of  Francisco  Jacinto  de  Salcedo,  his  wife  being  Jeronima 
de  Neira  and  Francisco  Frechel  being  second  husband  of  Jeronima. 

VALUATION  OF  PAINTINGS 

In  the  city  of  Madrid,  on  the  28th  day  of  February  1664,  I in 
person  and  undersigned,  in  compliance  with  the  deed  of  the  16th 
day  of  January  of  the  present  year,  made  known  to  Francisco  de 
Zurbaran  and  D.  Francisco  de  Rici,  master  painters  that  they  had 
been  named  by  the  parties  and,  accepted  said  nominations  in  my 
presence,  and  that  of  the  secretary,  they  made  the  following  val- 
uation : 

Paintings  of  the  dining-room — First  were  estimated  two 
landscapes,  with  black  frame,  yard  and  a quarter  broad  and 


a yard  high,  each  one  at  40  reales 80 

A picture  of  the  Disenchantment  and  final  Judgment,  with 
black  frame,  two  yards  high  and  a yard  and  a third  broad,  at 

three  hundred  reales  300 

Another,  the  Birth  of  Our  Saviour,  with  black  frame  and 
of  the  same  size,  at  hundred  and  thirty  reales 130 


149 


Another,  the  Conception  of  Our  Lady,  of  the  same  measure 

with  black  frame,  at  hundred  and  ten  reales no 

The  picture  of  a Battle,  with  black  frame  at 200 

Another,  a flower-pot  with  flowers,  with  black  frame  at 

hundred  fifty  reales 150 

Another  of  two  Landscapes  above  windows,  with  black 

frame  at  forty  reales 40 

Another  of  Magdalen,  two  yards  broad  and  one  yard  high, 

with  black  frame,  at  forty  reales 40 

Pictures  of  the  Oratory — Painting  of  St.  Peter,  with  black 

and  gold  frame 6 

A picture  of  Queen  Isabel,  of  a square  yard,  at  eight 

reales  8 

A print  upon  paper  of  Our  Lady  of  the  Sanctuary  at  eight 

reales  8 

Further  they  valued  a picture  of  St.  Francis  of  Assisi,  with 
black  frame,  of  a yard  and  a half  square,  at  five  hundred  and 

fifty  reales  550 

Another  of  Our  Lady,  the  Infant  Jesus  and  St.  Joseph,  of 
the  same  measure,  with  black  frame,  at  six  hundred  and  sixty 

reales  660 

Another  of  St.  Francis  de  Paula,  of  the  same  size  and  black 

frame,  at  five  hundred  reales 500 

A small  picture  of  the  Salutation  with  little  angels  at  hun- 
dred reales loo 

A Christ  Crucified,  with  black  frame,  at  twenty  reales.  ...  20 

Another  of  Our  Saviour  in  Resurrection  appearing  to  Mag- 
dalene, a yard  and  a half  square,  at  eight  hundred  reales.  . . . 800 
Another,  ot  St.  Jerome,  of  same  size,  at  three  hundred  reales  300 

Another  of  St.  John,  of  same  size,  at  ten  reales 10 

Four  Heads  of  Apostles,  with  black  frames,  of  half  a yard 

square,  at  six  hundred  and  twenty-four  reales 624 

Two  little  paintings,  one  with  various  figures  and  a new 
born  baby,  of  a quarter  yard  square  and  black  frame,  and  the 
other  a beggar  in  a cart,  of  half  a yard,  and  black  frame,  at 
ninety-nine  reales 99 


150 


A picture  on  wood  representing  the  Temptations  of  St. 
Anthony,  of  three  quarter  yard  square  and  with  an  ebony 

frame,  at  two  hundred  and  forty  reales 240 

A Christ  Crucified,  in  ivory,  with  base  of  ebony  and  edges  of 

silver,  at  4^*^ 

A picture  of  the  Infant  Jesus,  with  stones  inlaid,  black 

frame,  at  hundred  and  ten  reales 110 

Paintings  of  the  Parlor — Two  views,  one  of  the  Virgin,  of 
a yard  and  a half  wide  and  a yard  high,  at  three  hundred 
reales,  the  other  one  the  Stoning  of  Christ  leaving  the  Tem- 
ple, of  same  size,  at  three  hundred  and  thirty  reales 630 

The  Adoration  of  the  Kings,  of  three  yards  wide  and  two 

yards  and  a half  high,  with  black  frame  at 1500 

Four  stained  glass  windows,  one  in  the  parlor,  two  in  the 
alcove  and  the  other  one  in  the  dining-room.  Two  views,  one 
of  which  is  a Child  thrown  into  the  sea,  and  the  other  some 
women — story  of  Moses — of  a square  yard,  with  black  frame, 

at  five  hundred 500 

The  miracle  of  Moses  striking  the  rock,  with  black  frame, 

three  hundred  and  thirty-two  reales 332 

The  picture  of  Job,  of  a square  yard  and  with  black  frame, 

at  hundred  reales  loo 

The  Death  of  Abel,  of  a yard  and  a half  high,  and  a yard 
and  a sixth  wide,  with  black  frame,  at  four  hundred  and  forty 

reales  440 

The  serpents  of  Moses,  one  yard  square,  with  black  frame, 

at  three  hundred  reales. 300 

Moses,  in  the  field,  gathering  manna,  half  size,  at  hundred 

and  thirty-two  reales 132 

Four  engravings  of  equal  size,  of  a yard  and  a third  square 
with  black  frame,  embossed, — one  being  the  Marriage  of 
Cana — the  other  the  Battle  of  Santiago,  and  the  others  figures 

unknown,  at  40 

An  engraving  which  represents  the  Baptism  of  Christ  and 
the  other  the  Preaching  of  St.  John  in  the  Desert,  at  thou- 
sand and  six  reales 1600 


1^1 


Two  pictures,  one  of  a chocoiate-pot  and  the  other  of  some 

stained  glass,  at  two  hundred  reales 200 

An  engraving  of  the  Infant  Jesus  sleeping,  of  half  a yard 

square,  at  four  hundred  reales 400 

A canvas  representing  Jesus  Christ  dead  in  the  arms  of  Our 
Lady,  of  half  a yard  square,  at  hundred  and  twenty  reales.  . . 120 

A flower-pot  with  two  artichokes,  at  fifty  reals 50 

The  Destruction  of  Troy,  with  black  frame,  of  two  yards 
wide  and  two  and  a quarter  high,  at  two  hundred  and  twenty 

reales  220 

A Child  Jesus,  with  black  frame,  of  about  a yard,  at  hun- 
dred and  fifty  reales 150 

Our  Lady  of  the  Conception — copy  of  the  one  owned  by 
the  Admiral  of  three  yards  high,  with  black  frame,  at  six  hun- 
dred reales 600 

Pictures  in  the  Room  where  Juan  de  Salcedo  died — Ten 
small  pictures  of  the  Kings,  of  three  quarter  yard  square,  with 

black  and  gold  frame 120 

Another  of  Magdalen,  of  a yard  and  a third,  with  black 

frame,  at  sixty  six  reales 66 

Another  of  Our  Lady  of  the  Miracles,  at  sixteen 16 

Another  of  Our  Lady,  the  Infant  Jesus  and  St.  John,  at 

thirty-three  reales  33 

Our  Saviour  Crucified,  of  a yard  square,  at  twelve  reales.  . . 12 

St.  Inez,  of  same  size,  at  six  reales 6 

St.  Theresa,  same  size,  at  six  reales 6 

A head  of  a water  carrier,  at  ten  reales 10 

A small  picture  of  the  King  our  Lord,  at  eighteen  reales.  . . 18 

Our  Lady  of  the  Solitude,  at  twenty-four  reales 24 

St.  Anthony  and  the  Infant  Jesus,  at  thirty  reales 30 

St.  Jerome,  of  a yard  and  a quarter  high  and  a quarter  of  a 

yard  wide,  at  fifty  reales 50 

Six  small  and  old  landscapes,  all  at  three 3 

Twelve  views  of  Seville,  old,  at  twelve  reales 12 

These  pictures  were  appraised  in  the  mentioned  sums, 


152 


and  the  undersigned  swore  by  Our  Lord  and  the  sign  of 
the  Cross  that  the  valuations  were  done  faithfully,  ac- 
cording to  their  knowledge  and  judgment,  without  any 
damage  to  anyone  of  the  parties;  and  they  all  signed  in 
true  faith — Francisco  de  Zurbaran — ^Francisco  de  Rici — 
Before  me — Manuel  Gutierrez  Martel. 


153 


NOTES 


^ This  name  is  written  with  an  accent  on  the  last  syllable  by  the  critics  of 
Art ; but  in  the  regions  whence  it  proceeds,  Zurbaran  is  without  any  accent. 

^ The  exposition  of  Zurbaran’s  paintings  in  one  of  the  Salons  of  the  Prado 
Museum,  1905. 

^ It  is  proved  that  he  lived  in  1664,  as  further  on  we  shall  see. 

* Appendix  No.  l. 

® In  a document  relative  to  the  subject  discussed  by  Alonso  Cano,  in  regard 
to  the  two  names  with  which  Zurbaran  signed  his  pictures,  Sr.  Jose  Gestoso  y 
Perez  says  that  the  name  of  Zurbaran’s  mother  was  Marquez  and  not  Salazar, 
in  a study  of  the  Dictionary  of  the  Arts  which  flourished  in  Seville,  from 
the  thirteenth  to  the  seventeenth  centuries,  Seville,  1900.  Printed  by  La 
Andalucia  Moderna,  book  2,  page  126;  and  this  same  peculiarity  is  found 
in  the  document  in  which  Velasquez  is  named  Knight  of  St.  James. 

® Eduardo  Mier.  Art  in  Spam.  Fortnightly  review  of  the  art  of  Draw- 
ing, Madrid,  1863.  Printed  by  M.  Galiano,  Vol.  II,  page  181. 

^ Sr.  Tormo  y Monzo  has  studied  Zurbaran  for  a long  time  and  has  writ- 
ten about  him  the  following  articles  and  pamphlets  which  I recommend  to 
my  readers;  “How  Zurbaran  Began  to  Be  Noted  and  how  Other  Artists  of 
Hts  7 ime  Became  Known  to  the  Public.”  La  Epoca,  March  31,  1905. 
“Zurbaran  in  the  Wake  of  Velasquez,  April  14. 

The  Progress  of  the  Intensely  Personal  Technique  of  Zurbaran,  May  12. 
The  Daring  Color  of  Zurbaran,  Repeated  Afterwards  by  Velasquez,  May  27. 
Zurbaran  at  Court:  the  Last  Years  of  His  Artistic  Work,  June  6.  The 
Monastery  of  Guadalupe  and  Zurbaran  s Paintings,  Madrid,  Blass  & Co., 
1905.  A Painting  by  Zurbaran,  the  Christ  of  Motrico,  No.  4 of  the  review 
Cultura  Espanola,  November  1905.  The  Dispersal  of  Zurbaran  s Paintings 
in  Cadiz,  same  review,  February  13,  1909.  Mentioning  also  the  paintings 
of  the  Labors  of  Hercules  of  Zurbaran,  in  the  article  entitled : Velasquez  and 
the  Salon  of  the  Kings  at  Buen  Retiro,  the  Poet  of  the  Palace  and  of  the 
Painter.  Bulletin  of  the  Spanish  Society  of  Research,  No.  8 and  2 of  the 
year  1911. 

^History  of  Spanish  Literature  from  Its  Origin  to  the  Year  igoo.  Trans- 
lated from  English  by  Adolfo  Bonilla  y San  Martin,  with  a preliminary  study 
of  Marcelino  Menendez  y Pelayo,  Madrid.  Printed  by  La  Espana  Moderna, 
Idamor  Moreno,  printer,  without  date,  page  374. 

® Parnassus  of  Spanish  Painting,  enriched  with  the  Lives  of  the  eminent 
Painters  and  Sculptors  of  Spain  who  have  embellished  the  Nation  with  their 
heroic  Works  and  illustrious  Figures,  and  have  come  to  these  Provinces  to 
contribute  to  their  Fame  with  their  glorious  Art.  Classified  according  to  the 


154 


period  in  which  each  of  them  flourished  to  immortalize  the  memory  which 
those  sublime  and  illustrious  geniuses  have  won  from  posterity,  by  D.  An- 
tonio Palomino  de  Castro  y Velasco,  Madrid,  1797.  Typ.  Sanchez,  Vol.  Ill, 
chapter  VIII,  page  52S. 

Dictionary  of  the  Most  Illustrious  Masters  of  Fine  Arts  in  Spain,  com- 
posed by  D.  Juan  Augustin  Cean  Bermudez,  and  published  by  the  Royal 
Academy  of  San  Fernando,  Madrid.  Print,  by  the  Widow  Ibarra,  1800. 
Vol.  6,  page  45. 

D.  Jose  Gestoso  y Perez,  work  mentioned,  Vol.  II,  page  126.  See  Ap- 
pendix No.  2. 

''■^Paintings  of  Seville — Study  of  the  Sevillian  School  of  Art  from  Its  Ori- 
gin to  the  Present  Day.  Seville,  1885.  Typ.  Girones  y Orduna,  page  65. 

^^Descriptive  and  Historical  Catalogue  of  the  Prado  Museum  of  Madrid, 
by  D.  Pedro  de  Madrazo.  Part  I.  Italian  and  Spanish  Schools.  Madrid, 
1872.  Print.  Rivadeneyra,  page  645. 

Quoted  in  the  Catalogue  of  Paintings  and  Sculptures  of  the  Provincial 
Museum  of  Seville.  Edition  E.  Rasco,  1897.  Pages  57,  58. 

Sr.  Beas  does  not  declare  this  with  complete  certainty,  as  a relatively 
large  period  elapsed  between  the  two  works  (1625-1631)  and  in  it  Zurbaran 
executed  many  other  works. 

Illustrated  Catalogue  of  the  Exposition  of  Zurbaran' s Paintings.  Ma- 
drid, phototype  and  printing  by  J.  Lacoste,  1905.  Pages  12  and  13. 

D.  Jose  y Perez,  work  mentioned,  Vol.  II,  page  124,  i.  e.  Dictionary  of 
Sevillia.  Art. 

Work  mentioned,  page  12. 

In  his  article  on  Velasquez,  the  Salon  of  the  Kings  at  Buen  Retiro  and 
the  Poet  of  the  Palace  and  of  the  Painter,  from  which,  granting  my  request, 
he  had  the  goodness  to  transcribe  all  the  information  concerning  the  Labors 
of  Hercules  by  the  great  Extremadurian,  and  which  I publish  in  the  interest- 
ing letter  given  in  Appendix  No.  4 of  this  book. 

Number  corresponding  to  the  third  quarterly  of  1909,  in  an  article  en- 
titled : Francisco  de  Zurbaran,  Painter  to  the  King. 

See  appendix  No.  4. 

Library  of  Fine  Arts.  History  of  Spanish  Painting;  Madrid,  La 
Espaha  Editorial,  without  date.  Printed  by  the  successor  of  G.  Cruzado, 
Felipe  Marques,  page  1 53. 

Corresponding  to  the  l8th  of  April,  1905,  Madrid. 

Testimony  to  the  Titles  of  Diego  de  Silva  Velasquez,  Gentleman  in 
W aiting  to  the  Palace,  and  Gentleman  of  the  Bedchamber  to  His  Majesty', 
Postulate  for  the  Vesture  of  the  Order  of  Santiago.  Found  by  D.  G.  Cru- 
zada  Villamil  in  the  Archives  of  the  Order  of  St.  James,  which  were  brought 
from  Ucles  to  Madrid,  while  D.  Luis  Eguilaz  was  director  of  the  Historical 
and  National  Archives,  and  they  were  published  in  the  “Re vista  de  Europe” 
Vol.  II  (of  the  year  1874),  pages  39,  80,  105,  275  and  402.  The  part  con- 
cerning the  declaration  made  by  Zurbaran  is  on  pages  106,  107. 

The  only  copy  that  remains  today  is  owned  by  D.  Jacinto  Octovio  Picon. 
It  is  not  known  where  the  Academy  of  St.  Fernando’s  copy  now  is. 


155 


Appendix  No.  5. 

In  his  quoted  Essay  upon  a Dictionary  of  Arts,  etc.,  Vol.  II,  page  126, 
he  reproduces  it  and  says : “On  the  28th  of  May,  Dona  Beatriz  de  Morales, 
wife  of  Francisco  de  Zurburan,  was  buried  in  the  Magdalene  church  in  Se- 
ville.” Page  102,  Vol.  II,  of  the  Registry  of  the  Dead,  Gomez  Aceves. 
Notes  of  the  parish  books.  Library  of  the  Society  of  Economies. 

D.  Jose  Gestoso:  Essay  upon  a Dictionary  of  Arts,  etc.,  Vol.  III.  Ap- 
pendix to  Vol.  I and  II  (year  MCMIX).  Print.  La  Andalucia  Moderna. 
Page  422.  These  notes  are  contained  in  a paper  fastened  on  the  back  of  the 
picture  showing  the  portrait  of  a young  man,  richly  dressed,  which  is  pre- 
served in  the  office  of  the  Mayor,  in  the  town  hall  of  Seville,  and  which  was 
one  of  the  canvases  given,  in  October,  1898,  by  the  Infante  D.  Antonio  and 
his  sister  the  Countess  of  Paris.  We  doubt  if  this  is  a portrait  of  the  artist 
painted  by  himself. 

Registry  of  Baptisms  of  the  Sanctuary  of  said  year,  page  50. 

According  to  this  author,  pages  47  to  50  of  Vol.  VI  of  the  mentioned 
dictionary. 

Which  remain  in  their  former  place. 

Sr.  Tormo  y Monzo  gives  a detailed  description  of  the  paintings  of  Zur- 
baran  which  are  out  of  Spain,  and  makes  interesting  remarks  about  them 
in  his  letter,  published  in  appendix  No.  3 of  this  book. 

I omit  the  description  made  of  this  picture  in  the  catalogue,  because  I 
have  already  written  that  of  Sr.  Sentenach  and  further  on  will  quote  that 
made  by  Mr.  Lefort. 

Of  the  spectator. 

At  the  same  time  as  those  of  different  other  artists ; this  discovery  has 
been  described  by  Sr.  Gestoso  in  a pamphlet  of  28  pages,  entitled:  “A  list 
of  pictures  in  the  cathedral  of  Seville.”  Seville.  In  the  office  of  El  Correo 
de  Andalucia,  1909. 

In  the  Carthusian  Monastery  of  Jerez. 

The  best  of  them  passed  on,  at  the  death  of  the  Dukes,  to  their  daugh- 
ter, the  Countess  de  Paris. 

See  the  review  Cultura  Espahola,  Vol.  IV^  pages  1,  137  to  150,  of  the 
article  by  D.  Elias  Tormo  y Monzo  on  “A  Van  Dyck,  a Zurbaran,  a Villa- 
cis?”  and  a canvas  of  the  Florentine  sixteenth  century,  unknown  and  stored 
up  in  Spain. 

39  Work  mentioned.  Vol.  Ill,  Chapter  VIII,  page  527,  i.  e..  The  Spanish 
Parnassas,  etc.,  by  Palomino. 

Work  mentioned.  Vol.  VI,  page  44.  Cean  Bermudez’s  Historic  Dic- 
tionary. 

The  great  Artists,  Riberta  and  Zurbaran. 

Work  mentioned,  page  645.  Madrazo’s  Hist.  Catalogue  of  Museum  of 
Prado. 

Work  mentioned,  page  6. 

That  which  is  preserved  in  the  Prado  Museum. 

*■’ History  of  Painters  of  All  Schools  (Spanish  School)  by  Mr.  Charles 
Blanc,  W.  Biiger,  Paul  Mautz,  L.  \’iardot  and  Paul  Lefort.  Paris  1849. 


V,  Jules  Renouard,  Director,  G.  Ethion  Peron,  page  i,  of  the  chapter  on 
Zurbaran. 

^'’’Illustrated  Popular  Encyclopedia  of  Sciences  and  Arts.  Formed  by 
Frederico  Gillman,  Madrid,  1885.  Print.  Enrique  Rubihos.  Vol.  IV. 
Spanish  Painting.  The  Great  Masters,  etc.,  page  788. 

Work  quoted,  page  63. 

Fine  Arts.  History  of  Architecture,  Sculpture  and  Painting.  Barce- 
lona, 1875.  Print.  Jepus,  page  99. 

Opinions  which  the  review  of  Madrid  “Nuestro  Tiempo”  reproduced  in 
its  first  year.  No.  2,  February  1901.  Vol.  I,  pages  248  to  250. 

Work  quoted.  Vol.  II,  page  181.  “Art  in  Spain”  by  E.  Wier. 

Work  quoted,  page  145.  History  of  the  Artists  of  All  Countries,  P. 
Lefort,  etc. 

r>2  “Which  according  to  the  manuscript  of  Loaysa  (as  Cean  Bermudez  says 
in  his  mentioned  Dictionary,  Vol.  VI,  page  40)  is  the  portrait  of  D.  Augustin 
Abreu  de  Escobar,  who  was  prebendary  of  this  holy  church.” 

It  was  not  one,  but  seven  years  before,  since  the  Apotheosis  is  signed 
1631. 

Francisco  Navarro  Ledesma? 

The  Monastery  of  Guadalupe  and  Zurbaran  s Paintings.  Chapter  of 
the  Sacristy  and  the  Paintings  by  Zurbaran,  pages  27  to  35. 

1 his  refers  to  the  series  of  photographic  reproductions  of  Guadalupe, 
done  by  Sr.  Moreno.  Numbers  11  and  20  correspond  to  the  total  photog- 
raphies of  the  sacristy  and  of  the  chapel  of  St.  Jerome. 

Measuring  in  height  12  feet  2 inches  and  in  width  9 feet  2 inches. 

In  his  mentioned  work:  The  Guadalupe  Monastery  and  Zurbaran’ s 
Paintings. 

Vol.  IX,  1905,  pages  198  to  20J.  “Barcelona  Review  of  Archt.  Engi-^ 
neering.” 

It  was  not  Roelas  but  Pedro  Diaz  de  Villanueva,  but  the  case  is  the 
same. 

The  St.  Francis  owned  by  Beruete  and  the  Christ  replacing  his  garments, 
of  the  parochial  church  of  Jadraque  ( 1661). 

®-  No  one  who  examines  certain  of  his  paintings  could  think  thus.  (Note 
of  the  author). 

In  the  mentioned  volume  I,  pages  98-99  of  the  Bulletin  of  the  Provincial 
Commission  of  Historical  and  Artistic  Monuments  of  Cadiz,  1908. 

Sr.  Alcantara  was  still  believing  that  he  was  apprenticed  to  Roelas. 

®®  On  pages  31  to  33. 

Work  mentioned,  page  18. 

“"Referring  to  his  article:  The  Dispersal  of  Zurbaran  s Paintings  in' 

Cadiz,  quoted  in  the  note  on  page  31. 

The  Labors  of  Hercules — Ten  canvases  were  in  the  Museum  and  no 
more  than  ten  have  been  mentioned  in  the  inventories.  The  number  of  the 
great  Battle  compositions  was  twelve.  As  there  were  five  windows  at  each 
side  of  the  Salon,  and  five  situated  above  them  at  a certain  distance,  my 
opinion  is  that  the  Labors  were  placed  between,  that  is  having  one  window 


above  and  one  below;  and  that  the  Battle  pictures  were  put  between  two 
Labors  and  between  two  windows,  besides  those  which  occupied  the  corners. 
Thus  we  can  explain  the  number  which  is  attached  to  each  one  of  those 
canvases. 

The  catalogue  of  the  Museum  and  the  inventories  do  not  agree  upon  two 
of  the  subjects  (although  they  do  on  the  eight  remaining  ones).  They 
mention  the  Fight  of  Hercules  with  Atlantis,  the  Stables  of  King  Augias, 
the  Separation  of  the  river  Calpe  and  Abyla  and  the  Turning  back  of  the 
river  Alpheus.  I cannot  find  an  explanation  of  this  disagreement.  (Note 
of  Sr.  Tormo.) 

Although  Nardi  has  been  for  about  thirty  years  Painter  to  the  King, 
the  art  critics  do  not  mention  any  of  his  works  in  the  palaces  or  royal  habita- 
tions. (Note  of  Sr.  Tormo.) 

Upon  the  authority  of  Sr.  Gomez  Moreno,  we  may  include  within  the 
authentical  works  of  Zurbaran  a magnificent  St.  Cecilia,  of  which  he  secured 
me  photographs  and  which  belongs  to  some  private  collection  in  Granada. 

As  he  was  preparing  some  time  ago  a study  of  the  works  of  Spanish  Art 
preserved  in  foreign  countries,  he  discovered  an  undisputable  work  of 
Zurbaran,  a picture  of  the  Holy  Family,  signed  1659 — perhaps  1639 — 
preserved  in  the  Buda-Pest  Museum  bought  in  1905,  and  which  is,  in  the 
opinion  of  all,  the  worthy  companion  of  the  wonderful  Immaculate  also 
kept  there,  which  is  signed  by  the  artist  1661,  and  which  certainly  was  not 
acquired  by  the  Museum  in  the  Estarhazy  House,  in  the  purchase  of  the 
famous  Viennese  collection,  but  rather  received,  later  on,  through  a donation 
of  Prince  Nicholas. 

I cannot  guarantee  the  authenticity  of  the  following  pictures  which  I 
have  noted  in  the  report  of  my  excursion:  The  Holy  Family  (No.  245) 

in  the  Stuttgart  Museum;  a St.  Francis  of  Assisi  (No.  1291)  in  the  Munich 
Museum ; a Child  Mary  at  Prayer,  in  the  Petrograd  Museum ; the  St.  Cath- 
erine of  Sienna,  at  Amiens;  the  Virgin,  at  Valenciennes;  a Monk,  in  the 
Caen  Museum;  St.  Francis  of  Assisi,  in  the  Museum  of  Chartres;  the 
Martyrdom  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist,  in  the  Quimper  Museum;  the  por- 
trait of  a Priest  with  the  Mitre,  and  the  Inebriation  of  Noah,  at  Pau ; Solomon 
surrounded  by  his  Wives,  in  the  Museum  of  Tarbes ; St.  Francis  of  Assisi, 
in  the  Perpignan  Museum;  another  St.  Francis  in  Lyons;  St.  Agueda  and 
an  Archangel  Gabriel,  in  Montpellier;  St.  Barbara,  in  the  Avignon  Museum; 
another  St.  Francis  at  Marseilles,  another  at  Besangon. 

Nothing  is  surprising  in  the  fact  that  so  many  provincial  museums  of 
France  should  possess  works  of  the  style  of  Zurbaran,  since  we  know  the 
depredations  which  the  generals  of  Napoleon  committed  in  their  wars,  and 
also  the  little  financial  value  which  was,  even  until  the  end  of  the  XIX 
century,  attributed  to  such  canvases. 

Without  speaking  of  the  paintings  preserved  in  the  Louvre  and  the  Na- 
tional Gallery  in  London,  I will  mention  here  St.  Andrew  (No.  15  of  the 
Duke  of  Sutherland’s  Gallery,  in  Strafford  House,  and  in  the  same  (No.  73) 
the  Virgin  Child  and  St.  John  Child,  signed  1653;  Annunciation  in 
Dudley  House,  a remarkable  painting  which  was  perhaps  as  another  famous 
work  by  Murillo,  in  the  Northbrook  collection,  or  the  Stirling  in  Keir.  (Note 
of  Sr.  Tormo.) 

if8 


THREE  HUNDRED  AND  TEN  COPIES 
OF  THIS  BOOK  PRINTED  DURING  THE 
MONTH  OF  JANUARY  MCMXVIII 


GETTY  CENTER  LIBRARY  MAIN 

NO  813  Z8  C23  BKS 

c.  1 Cascales  y Muenoz.  J 

Francisco  de  Zurbaran;  his  epoch,  his  11 


